I certainly agree that if we can start with WAP, we're that much further ahead, and I'm happily looking into the example you gave on the wiki page. I should have remembered that in order to become a W3C rec, there would have had to be impls.
I have no argument against AS paging (and LDP paging never made it past a Working Group note [1]-- it didn't become part of the rec proper). I was just trying to figure out what the boundaries are for our work. I found this in that note [2]: > Clients generally have no insight into the allocation of information to > pages, although in some cases currently defined only for LDPCs the server can > expose its algorithm. which pretty much seems to exclude ordering. Of course an extension could go beyond that, but I don't see any amazing advantage to LDP Paging that would make us go nuts for it and try to break out of protocol for it. For anyone who is _REALLY_ interested in this question, there's a thread [3] that goes into considerable detail about the reasoning behind LDP Paging. ajs6f [1] https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/hg/ldp-paging.html [2] https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/hg/ldp-paging.html#ldpr-PagingIntro [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-comments/2014Sep/0003.html > On Jan 29, 2019, at 12:33 PM, Benjamin Young <byo...@bigbluehat.com> wrote: > > Great start! I added some links there. 😊 > > Given that Web Annotation's have their own protocol (based on LDP), I'd > prefer we aim for that target. > > The LDP style paging was considered by the Working Group, but we went with > ActivityStreams-style paging because ordering matters--see this note from the > spec: > "Activity Streams Collection > [activitystreams-core<https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol/#bib-activitystreams-core>] > model is used for paging, as in-page ordering is an important requirement." > -- see https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol/#h-summary > > LDP's ordering, iirc, was "random" or at least didn't express explicit > ordering, but you know more about LDP than I do. 😊 > > Thoughts? > > > -- > > http://bigbluehat.com/ > > http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung > > ________________________________ > From: ajs6f <aj...@apache.org> > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 12:17 PM > To: dev@annotator.incubator.apache.org > Cc: Randall Leeds > Subject: Re: LDP and persistence Was: introduction > > Sure-- I've made a page at: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-annotator/wiki/LDP-and-Web-Annotation-Protocol-Implementations > > although I don't know that there's really a wrong way for us to go about > this! :grin: > > I'm afraid that I'm not aware of any other Web Annotation Protocol-specific > impls, but that says more about my ignorance than anything else. > > On paging in particular, are we committed to building on the Activity Streams > model via > > https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol/#annotation-pages > > ? > > ajs6f > >> On Jan 23, 2019, at 1:51 PM, Benjamin Young <byo...@bigbluehat.com> wrote: >> >> Agreed! Perhaps we could start by building a list on the wiki (and later the >> site) of LDP and Web Annotation Protocol (specific) implementations. >> >> Once we have that, I'd reckon some browser-side client plumbing would be in >> order (i.e. annotation service discovery, code to get a collection of >> annotations based on the current documents URI, pagination across annotation >> collections, etc). >> >> Sound about right? >> >> >> -- >> >> http://bigbluehat.com/ >> >> http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Randall Leeds <rand...@apache.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 1:16 PM >> To: dev@annotator.incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: LDP and persistence Was: introduction >> >> This makes good sense to me. >> >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 09:59 ajs6f <aj...@apache.org wrote: >> >>> Hi, Benjamin-- >>> >>> No problem. I'm obviously not all that good about quick response myself! :0 >>> >>> It seems to me that these two things (the relationship to LDP and the >>> question of backend persistence) could be connected: is it not possible to >>> choose LDP for the data storage abstraction layer for Annotator? Of course, >>> we would probably have to pick at least one LDP implementation to package >>> with Annotator as a choice for those who "choose not to choose" for >>> themselves or for people who are just interested in playing with web >>> annotation and don't need to think about production deployment. >>> >>> If we chose LDP for the abstraction layer, then we could also choose a >>> default component that can use whatever we think are appropriate concrete >>> forms for persistence. (Benjamin Goering mentioned using widely-available >>> RDBMSes, for example, which is certainly a good and common pattern, and >>> plenty of LDP impls can use them.) >>> >>> One reason I suggest this: if we choose for a lower-level persistence >>> abstraction (e.g. working directly against an SQL backend) and given that >>> the Web Annotation protocol extends LDP, we will find ourselves rewriting >>> code that LDP implementations have already written and which already is >>> tested in use. >>> >>> ajs6f >>> >>>> On Jan 15, 2019, at 9:55 AM, Benjamin Young <byo...@bigbluehat.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Adam! >>>> >>>> First, huge apologies for letting this slip through the cracks caused by >>> all the holiday-ing (at least for me ;) )! >>>> >>>> Second, you're spot on about Web Annotation Protocol being essentially >>> an extension of the Linked Data Platform (LDP) [1] spec. Also, Web >>> Annotations, being based on JSON-LD, can be stored into any triple store. >>> The server-side implementations tested by the W3C so far [2] have used the >>> filesystem, a relational database, or a JSON-friendly NoSQL database >>> (MongoDB, Apache CouchDB, PouchDB, etc). >>>> >>>> Honestly, database selection is one of the things that has tripped me up >>> in contributing a server implementation. I want it to be database/store >>> agnostic, ideally, but that comes with it's own "tyranny of choice" among >>> data storage abstraction layers. 😋 >>>> >>>> In the end, it's up to the group to decide what to build and what to >>> build on and in what language...etc. >>>> >>>> Most of the work has gone into the DOM connective tissue code, and I've >>> brought over some of the Web Annotation Data Model validation code [3]. >>> There's still more to do on all fronts. 😊 >>>> >>>> Let me know if you have thoughts on the plans here. Your experience with >>> Jena (both as a project and a tool) would be very helpful! >>>> >>>> Cheers! >>>> Benjamin >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/ >>>> [2] >>> https://github.com/w3c/test-results/tree/gh-pages/annotation-protocol#index-of-implementations-tested >>>> [3] >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-annotator/blob/master/test/data-model.mjs >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> http://bigbluehat.com/ >>>> >>>> http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: ajs6f <aj...@apache.org> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2019 4:14 PM >>>> To: dev@annotator.incubator.apache.org >>>> Subject: introduction >>>> >>>> Hi, Annnotator folks! >>>> >>>> My name is Adam Soroka and I'm a committer for Apache Jena. For a day >>> job I work at the Smithsonian Institution and I've been interested in >>> semantic technology for quite a while in the context of so-called cultural >>> heritage. I watched the W3C Web Annotation WG with interest and I was happy >>> to see extensions developed for the International Image Interoperability >>> Framework [1]. >>>> >>>> I'm still a little uncertain about the scope of the Annotator project. >>> It seems to include a node.js server component to store and manage >>> annotations as well as browser-side tooling. I was under the impression >>> (very likely wrong!) that annotations, as RDF graphs, could be stored in >>> anything that can store RDF (triplestores, etc.) and that in particular, >>> LDP implementations should be able to support the annotation protocol >>> (almost?) directly. Is this wrong? Are there special requirements on >>> annotation servers that make it appropriate to use a special-purpose part? >>>> >>>> Thanks for any clarification/info/advice! >>>> >>>> ajs6f >>>> >>>> [1] https://iiif.io/api/annex/openannotation/index.html >>> >>> >
