Nabble - w3.org - public-annotea-dev

Re: Annotea futures? Annotation standards in 2009...

2009-05-23T01:28:51Z

Dan Brickley wrote:

> On 22/5/09 18:24, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>> Dan Brickley wrote:
>>> (I'm cc:'ing 3 lists, rather warily; if the thread gets long, please
>>> consider trimming it to just use semantic-web@...)
>>>
>>> Thoughts? Am I missing some developments? What would Annotea look like
>>> if rebuilt for the Web of 2009? If it's in RDF, the query part would
>>> just use SPARQL, and topic classification would be SKOS.
>>
>> IMO the use of RDF seems to add a significant "complexity tax" on
>> implementations.
>
> Worth noting, and going into the practical details. Were you working
> solely with the Mozilla RDF APIs? XUL Templates etc? Or other more
> modern RDF libraries?

Mozilla APIs. But I also have bad memories of debugging responses from
the server (and trying to read the RDF Schema spec). As a non-expert, I
see RDF in the same category as XML Schema - trying to do much and
failing to "make the easy things easy", at least in the context of
annotations.

>> > What else? Is
>>> there implementation experience from Annotea adopters and implementors
>>> gathered somewhere? Is there consensus for example on the best bits of
>>> information to keep if you want a robust reference to a piece of a
>>> potentially evolving page? How well do modern Web design habits (CSS,
>>> Ajax etc) interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations? Is
>>> everyone using Firefox addons, javascript bookmarklets and Web proxies
>>> or is there some hope for a cross-browser approach on the horizon?
>>
>> As an implementer, it seems to me that XPointer is not a great solution
>> for determining a selection of a web page. Theoretically it's only
>> specified for use with XML and not with HTML. Annotea glosses over this
>> problem, but there are real compatibility questions which I haven't seen
>> answered definitively (for example, if you have an 'implied' element not
>> present in the markup like "tbody", is it present in a constructed
>> XPointer)?
>
> Yup. This might be worth taking up with the HTML5 and WHATWG folks,
> since they're trying to write a spec that has a recovery model for ugly
> messy markup.
>
>> > How well do modern Web design habits (CSS,
>> > Ajax etc) interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations?
>>
>> Arguably Annozilla doesn't even work well with less modern Web design
>> (the hacks it performs in order to display icons in the document are
>> pretty horrible), but it doesn't seem to have caused many problems in
>> practice - or at least I haven't had many reported to me.
>
> If there aren't many problems, in what sense does it not perform well?
> (internal Engineering uglyness, or problems that will affect users?)

Annozilla makes internal changes to the DOM so that it can add icons and
highlighting to the document, creating spans and images. It's easy to
imagine stylesheets or scripts breaking as a result. (I know Mozilla has
XBL but it doesn't quite seem to fit my needs here, at least last time I
checked.)

>> My guess is that the use of Annozilla is pretty limited and that it
>> isn't getting
>> any widespread use on any pages with significant Ajax usage. It's
>> obviously trivial to create an Ajaxy page which would expose the
>> limitations of the schema, and you would imagine that real-life usage
>> would have the same difficulties.
>
> Yep. Perhaps the pages that are problematic that way might also be
> problematic in terms of assessibility, and Mobile Web -readyness too?
> Which would at least give authors other motivations to fix their markup,
> apart from annotate-ability.

This seems a bit optimistic.

Matthew

Re: Annotea futures? Annotation standards in 2009...

2009-05-22T09:35:44Z

On 22/5/09 18:24, Matthew Wilson wrote:

> Dan Brickley wrote:
>> (I'm cc:'ing 3 lists, rather warily; if the thread gets long, please
>> consider trimming it to just use semantic-web@...)
>>
>> Thoughts? Am I missing some developments? What would Annotea look like
>> if rebuilt for the Web of 2009? If it's in RDF, the query part would
>> just use SPARQL, and topic classification would be SKOS.
>
> IMO the use of RDF seems to add a significant "complexity tax" on
> implementations.

Worth noting, and going into the practical details. Were you working
solely with the Mozilla RDF APIs? XUL Templates etc? Or other more
modern RDF libraries?

> > What else? Is
>> there implementation experience from Annotea adopters and implementors
>> gathered somewhere? Is there consensus for example on the best bits of
>> information to keep if you want a robust reference to a piece of a
>> potentially evolving page? How well do modern Web design habits (CSS,
>> Ajax etc) interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations? Is
>> everyone using Firefox addons, javascript bookmarklets and Web proxies
>> or is there some hope for a cross-browser approach on the horizon?
>
> As an implementer, it seems to me that XPointer is not a great solution
> for determining a selection of a web page. Theoretically it's only
> specified for use with XML and not with HTML. Annotea glosses over this
> problem, but there are real compatibility questions which I haven't seen
> answered definitively (for example, if you have an 'implied' element not
> present in the markup like "tbody", is it present in a constructed
> XPointer)?

Yup. This might be worth taking up with the HTML5 and WHATWG folks,
since they're trying to write a spec that has a recovery model for ugly
messy markup.

> > How well do modern Web design habits (CSS,
> > Ajax etc) interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations?
>
> Arguably Annozilla doesn't even work well with less modern Web design
> (the hacks it performs in order to display icons in the document are
> pretty horrible), but it doesn't seem to have caused many problems in
> practice - or at least I haven't had many reported to me.

If there aren't many problems, in what sense does it not perform well?
(internal Engineering uglyness, or problems that will affect users?)

> My guess is that the use of Annozilla is pretty limited and that it isn't getting
> any widespread use on any pages with significant Ajax usage. It's
> obviously trivial to create an Ajaxy page which would expose the
> limitations of the schema, and you would imagine that real-life usage
> would have the same difficulties.

Yep. Perhaps the pages that are problematic that way might also be
problematic in terms of assessibility, and Mobile Web -readyness too?
Which would at least give authors other motivations to fix their markup,
apart from annotate-ability.

cheers,

Dan

Re: Annotea futures? Annotation standards in 2009...

2009-05-22T09:24:02Z

Dan Brickley wrote:
> (I'm cc:'ing 3 lists, rather warily; if the thread gets long, please
> consider trimming it to just use semantic-web@...)
>
> Hi all
>

> Thoughts? Am I missing some developments? What would Annotea look like
> if rebuilt for the Web of 2009? If it's in RDF, the query part would
> just use SPARQL, and topic classification would be SKOS.

IMO the use of RDF seems to add a significant "complexity tax" on
implementations.

> What else? Is
> there implementation experience from Annotea adopters and implementors
> gathered somewhere? Is there consensus for example on the best bits of
> information to keep if you want a robust reference to a piece of a
> potentially evolving page? How well do modern Web design habits (CSS,
> Ajax etc) interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations? Is
> everyone using Firefox addons, javascript bookmarklets and Web proxies
> or is there some hope for a cross-browser approach on the horizon?

As an implementer, it seems to me that XPointer is not a great solution
for determining a selection of a web page. Theoretically it's only
specified for use with XML and not with HTML. Annotea glosses over this
problem, but there are real compatibility questions which I haven't seen
answered definitively (for example, if you have an 'implied' element not
present in the markup like "tbody", is it present in a constructed
XPointer)?

> How well do modern Web design habits (CSS,
> Ajax etc) interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations?

Arguably Annozilla doesn't even work well with less modern Web design
(the hacks it performs in order to display icons in the document are
pretty horrible), but it doesn't seem to have caused many problems in
practice - or at least I haven't had many reported to me. My guess is
that the use of Annozilla is pretty limited and that it isn't getting
any widespread use on any pages with significant Ajax usage. It's
obviously trivial to create an Ajaxy page which would expose the
limitations of the schema, and you would imagine that real-life usage
would have the same difficulties.

Matthew

Re: Annotea futures? Annotation standards in 2009...

2009-05-22T08:36:08Z

Thanks Nikki, Phil. Good points!

This also reminds me that Media annotations is moving along nicely over
in a separate W3C group. See http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/

Also I've just signed up for a fresh Annotea account, as I wanted to try
Annozilla (http://annozilla.mozdev.org/). It seems all the w3.org signup
machine is still working, which was a pleasant suprise. It sets a user
up with username and password for posting annotations. So - thinking
again about how something like this would be built with 2009-era specs,
I suspect OAuth might be used here. This would allow clients to be
delegated an access token for reading/posting etc annotations. At the
moment Annotea assumes each user has an account and the password for
that account is directly shared with the apps that can post to it.
Perhaps there could be benefit in having the apps (whether desktop,
in-browser or website-based) use oauth tokens instead? Or perhaps I'm
just being trendy and trying to use too many shiny new things? I do
think that AtomPub+Oauth is worth investigating, despite premature
reports (http://norman.walsh.name/2009/05/07/timing) of it's death...

cheers,

Dan

Re: Annotea futures? Annotation standards in 2009...

2009-05-22T08:28:41Z

That's something I ought to look at too, Nikki.

Then there's POWDER which, unless something unexpected happens, will be
at Proposed Rec very soon. That's all about annotating/describing groups
of resources cf. adding annotations within specific resources but, since
the output (once processed) is RDF, it's all interoperable.

Phil.

NJ Rogers, Learning and Research Technology wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> You might want to look at our <http://code.google.com/p/caboto/> project
> which was a small spin-out effort from 3 projects each with a social
> software annotations aspect.
>
> We looked at use cases from different contexts and but this has not
> really been about annotating parts of a page but more about annotating
> resources (with a dedicated 'page') such as "an event", or making a
> time-based video annotation.
>
> Nikki
>
> --On 22 May 2009 16:00 +0200 Dan Brickley <danbri@...> wrote:
>
>> (I'm cc:'ing 3 lists, rather warily; if the thread gets long, please
>> consider trimming it to just use semantic-web@...)
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> I'm involved in helping advise a new not-for-profit project that is close
>> in approach to the old Annotea project, looking at annotations within
>> pieces of Web content, and their cross-linking, threading for discussion
>> etc. It's now 2009, over ten years since the original Annotea designs.
>> The Web has changed a lot since then, but the need to annotate it doesn't
>> seem to have gone away.
>>
>> See http://annotea.org/
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/Annotea/User/Tutorial/quicktutorial and nearby for
>> an overview of Annotea.
>>
>> Since then Web 2.0 has happened, and now many of the original themes of
>> Annotea are part of the mainstream Web developer perspective. And yet ...
>> looking at the comments to this 2007 techcrunch survey -
>> http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/04/10/5-ways-to-mark-up-the-web/ - I see
>> project after project, startup after startup, exploring this space
>> without any great emphasis on data exchange standards. I guess many of
>> them have APIs, probably a lot of them use RSS or Atom feeds. But we
>> certainly haven't yet to the place imagined by Annotea: an annotation
>> layer for the Web that allows comments, scribbles, reviews, discussions
>> to be freely interlinked and overlaid using open standard formats and
>> protocols.
>>
>> So I'm mailing the relevant (and pretty quiet) lists but cc:'ing
>> semantic-web@... too to ask where folk thing this stuff is heading.
>>
>> When is an annotation an annotation, versus a page that happens to be a
>> review, or happens to have as it's primary topic another page? For
>> annotations at the page level, it might be that mainstream RDF work
>> (linked data etc) has fulfilled some of the early promise of Annotea.
>>
>> But for the "annotating parts of a page" scenario that lies at the heart
>> of many people's notion of annotations, there doesn't seem to be much
>> happening in terms of practical and widely adopted standards. Lots of
>> startups, experiments etc but they all seem to be islands. And since
>> annotation systems are only really interesting when you have enough
>> annotations to get decent coverage, this seems a pity.
>>
>> Thoughts? Am I missing some developments? What would Annotea look like if
>> rebuilt for the Web of 2009? If it's in RDF, the query part would just
>> use SPARQL, and topic classification would be SKOS. What else? Is there
>> implementation experience from Annotea adopters and implementors gathered
>> somewhere? Is there consensus for example on the best bits of information
>> to keep if you want a robust reference to a piece of a potentially
>> evolving page? How well do modern Web design habits (CSS, Ajax etc)
>> interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations? Is everyone using
>> Firefox addons, javascript bookmarklets and Web proxies or is there some
>> hope for a cross-browser approach on the horizon?
>>
>> thanks for any suggestions, thoughts, links etc.
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ----------------------
> NJ Rogers, Technical Researcher
> (Senior Technical Developer and Coordinator of Web Futures)
> Institute for Learning and Research Technology (ILRT)
> Email:nikki.rogers@...
> Tel: +44(0)117 3314412 (Direct)
> Tel: +44(0)117 3314430 (Office)
>
>

--

Phil Archer
http://philarcher.org/www@20/

i-sieve technologies | W3C Mobile Web Initiative
Making Sense of the Buzz | www.w3.org/Mobile

Annotea futures? Annotation standards in 2009...

2009-05-22T07:00:41Z

(I'm cc:'ing 3 lists, rather warily; if the thread gets long, please
consider trimming it to just use semantic-web@...)

Hi all

I'm involved in helping advise a new not-for-profit project that is
close in approach to the old Annotea project, looking at annotations
within pieces of Web content, and their cross-linking, threading for
discussion etc. It's now 2009, over ten years since the original Annotea
designs. The Web has changed a lot since then, but the need to annotate
it doesn't seem to have gone away.

See http://annotea.org/
http://www.w3.org/2001/Annotea/User/Tutorial/quicktutorial and nearby
for an overview of Annotea.

Since then Web 2.0 has happened, and now many of the original themes of
Annotea are part of the mainstream Web developer perspective. And yet
... looking at the comments to this 2007 techcrunch survey -
http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/04/10/5-ways-to-mark-up-the-web/ - I see
project after project, startup after startup, exploring this space
without any great emphasis on data exchange standards. I guess many of
them have APIs, probably a lot of them use RSS or Atom feeds. But we
certainly haven't yet to the place imagined by Annotea: an annotation
layer for the Web that allows comments, scribbles, reviews, discussions
to be freely interlinked and overlaid using open standard formats and
protocols.

So I'm mailing the relevant (and pretty quiet) lists but cc:'ing
semantic-web@... too to ask where folk thing this stuff is heading.

When is an annotation an annotation, versus a page that happens to be a
review, or happens to have as it's primary topic another page? For
annotations at the page level, it might be that mainstream RDF work
(linked data etc) has fulfilled some of the early promise of Annotea.

But for the "annotating parts of a page" scenario that lies at the heart
of many people's notion of annotations, there doesn't seem to be much
happening in terms of practical and widely adopted standards. Lots of
startups, experiments etc but they all seem to be islands. And since
annotation systems are only really interesting when you have enough
annotations to get decent coverage, this seems a pity.

Thoughts? Am I missing some developments? What would Annotea look like
if rebuilt for the Web of 2009? If it's in RDF, the query part would
just use SPARQL, and topic classification would be SKOS. What else? Is
there implementation experience from Annotea adopters and implementors
gathered somewhere? Is there consensus for example on the best bits of
information to keep if you want a robust reference to a piece of a
potentially evolving page? How well do modern Web design habits (CSS,
Ajax etc) interact with the overlay of 3rd party annotations? Is
everyone using Firefox addons, javascript bookmarklets and Web proxies
or is there some hope for a cross-browser approach on the horizon?

thanks for any suggestions, thoughts, links etc.

cheers,

Dan

auto sizing

2009-04-02T17:23:57Z

I went to some trouble to produce the two examples I'm providing so I
hope everyone appreciates my efforts to keep the following two
iterations stripped down and color-standardized.

EXAMPLE 1
A version of the page I'm trying to build; TEXT-ONLY; and background-
colors in place of what would be a graphic (where applicable). Page
renders perfectly in both browsers; unfortunately it isn't what I'm
trying to build.

http://www.phone-sex-psychologist.com
http://www.phone-sex-hypnosis.com
http://www.phonesexhandjobs.org
http://www.smartphonesex.org
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com
http://www.wholeearthphonesex.com
http://www.freephonesex.org
http://www.1800phonesex.net
http://www.1on1phonesex.com
http://www.phonesexphone.com
http://www.hotphone.com
http://www.xxx-rated.com
http://www.phone-sex-handjobs.com
http://www.mootzie.com

Annotea server down until sufficiently motivated to fix it

2008-05-28T21:50:03Z

The annotea server is currently down. In order to prioritize its repair,
we need some idea who is using it right now. I know some of you use your
own instances. Please let me know if annotea.w3.org is needed by any of
you.
--
-eric

office: +1.617.258.5741 32-G528, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA
mobile: +1.617.599.3509

(eric@...)
Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.

signature.asc (492 bytes) Download Attachment

Re: Requesting Annotea annotations and bodies from a single query

2008-01-13T03:12:40Z

The TAG are having that argument right now. The trouble is the notion
of URL is overloaded, and people get confused between different usages.
Example: does <URL:http://www.webthing.com/~nick/> identify a subject
that is vaguely human? A browser pointing at that URL will retrieve
a series of bytes, and render them as a page about that subject.

OTOH, RDF uses URL explicitly as identifiers (the "words" of the
semantic web), and detaches them entirely from any content that
might be retrieved by a GET on a URL. This in turn leads to confusion
when Annotea substitutes XPointers[1] - which *do* depend on a GET
to have meaning.

> In your
> situation, each user's browser points them to different places (their
> own computer), making it not universal.

Not a problem. A URL doesn't have to point to anything at all.
The file:// protocol is perfectly valid. Don't forget, the
content of an http:// URL can be multivalued too. Try changing
your language preferences in your browser, and you'll find
different content at some familiar sites!

--
-- GoldED/386 2.42.G0614+

I will try to live with love... with dreams... and forever with tears...
http://www.w6statistics.org

iPhone 5

2007-09-22T07:07:35Z

Gathering regional iPhone provider speculation has once again become
tangible fact following the announcement that
telecommunications company Orange has been officially confirmed as the
exclusive carrier for Apples smartphone in France.

Orange chief executive officer Didier Lombard revealed the French
exclusivity deal yesterday during an industry event in
Vietnam, and also said that the diminutively sleek handsets would by
ready for retail by the close of November this year,
reports the Reuters news agency.

France Telecom parent company of Orange has expressed its belief that
the capture of the iPhone for the French market
will certainly bolster its sales throughout the country considering the
appeal of an Apple-branded device that bundles telephony
functionality with touch-screen technology, iTunes Store compatibility,
an onboard video/media player, and a Web browser
too.

As with the other European deals also confirmed this week, iPhone
consumers in France will have to pay a set amount for the
initial hardware along with a fixed term contract with Orange. At this
time, Orange is yet to confirm the iPhones hardware and
contractual prices.

The news of Oranges positioning to cover the French market completes
the iPhones carrier placement for Europes three
biggest regions, with Spains Telefonica O2 being confirmed this week
for the UK, along with Deutsche Telekoms T-Mobile
for Germany.

The UK price for the iPhone is 269 GBP for the handset plus an 18-month
O2 contract package that starts at 35 GBP per
month (rising as high as 55 GBP) and equates to a total minimum
financial outlay of 899 GBP.

Although the iPhone is certainly a success in North America, where it
launched in June of this year and has already passed 1
million unit sales, it remains to be seen whether European consumers
will be willing to embrace a device that doesnt run on the
extremely speedy and popular 3G networks. Unlike Europe, 3G is not
currently available in the US and, as such, has not
adversely affected the handsets performance appeal there.

With regard to the lack of 3G, Apple CEO Steve Jobs has said the iPhone
doesnt run on 3G seeing as the network would
apply undue strain on the devices internal battery a component of the
product already receiving a degree of criticism from
users in terms of its charge life.

http://www.wholeearthphonesex.com
http://www.phone-sex-psychologist.com
http://www.phone-sex-psychologist.com/phone-sex-student/
http://www.phone-sex-hypnosis.com
http://www.phone-sex-hypnosis.com/subconscious-phone-sex/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com
http://www.phone-sex-handjobs.com
http://www.phone-sex-handjobs.com/phone-sex-masturbation/
http://www.phone-sex-handjobs.com/handjob-phone-sex/
http://www.your-account.info
http://www.your-account.info/business.html
http://www.your-account.info/dangerous.html
http://www.your-account.info/hypnogirl.html
http://www.your-account.info/mistress.html
http://www.your-account.info/nature.html
http://www.your-account.info/smart-phone-sex/
http://www.freephonesex.org
http://www.1800phonesex.net
http://www.1on1phonesex.com
http://www.phonesexphone.com
http://www.hotphone.com
http://www.xxx-rated.com
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/anal-phone-sex/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/bdsm/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/beastiality/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/bisexual/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/clitoris/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/coitus/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/cyber/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/doggiestyle/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/ejaculation/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/erection/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/fornication/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/gloryhole/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/gspot/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/hump/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/hung/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/impotence/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/juice/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/morgasm/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/necrophilia/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/nymphomaniac/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/oral/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/quickie/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/rimming/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/toys/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/transsexual/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/upskirt/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/voyeurism/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/wet/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/xrated/
http://www.phone-sex-dictionary.com/zoophile/

Introduction

2007-09-08T07:30:31Z

Hi all,

I just subscribed to this list and wanted to introduce myself before posting. I'm Rob and coding and design is my hobby. So do nothing fancy but think I can learn a lot from all posts coming by in this W3C mailinglist.

I have a portal called Indelv.com (http://www.indelv.com/) and post some news on standards just to keep track of what is happening in the field. I know the site is not fully standardized, but I am working on it when I have free time.

So if you have some cool news or found a nice article, send me a note, I will repost some of it on Indelv, so I will not loose track of it. Hope I see nice tips passing by on this mailing list and in the future I might be a bit better and can even assist with answers.

Kind regards and have a good weekend

Rob

Re: Requesting Annotea annotations and bodies from a single query

2006-11-21T09:10:27Z

Annotea protocol was written to support the user browsing through the
annotations and rather having some information sooner than all the
information too late. The Algae queries supported wider range of
queries. I think now we could start using SPARQL for that.

If many people need this we can also discuss about updates to the
protocol. I remember that IBM SemTag project had an extension to get
more information at one request.

Marja

The Robin Berjon wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I don't know if this has come up before, I couldn't find mention of it
> in the archives but I'm not entirely certain that I'm covering the
> right lists in my search.
>
> Basically I'm working on a product that uses the Annotea protocol.
> Given a resource, it'll retrieve all the annotations and display them
> all, including their bodies. The problem I'm having is that querying
> for that resource will return a list of pointers to annotations and
> their bodies, after which I'll need to GET all the annotations, and
> then all their bodies. That's a lot of HTTP requests, in our case it
> could easily translate to hundreds of them.
>
> The Annotea Protocol WD (or whatever its equivalent in modern W3C
> process is) doesn't offer the option to retrieve all annotations and
> their bodies in the first query, or failing that to at least get
> annotation and body together. I was wondering if someone out there had
> implemented something like that, or had ideas about it.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> As best as I can make out, neither statement is not always correct.
> -- Doug Schepers
>
>
>

Annotea presentation objects

2006-04-02T19:21:18Z

I finally did some "real" work on Annotea Presentation objects.

The goal is to be able to define presenting order and other such
properties for bookmarks and topics but separately from them. This
helps, for instance when users subscribe different bookmark files.

I also made a new version of Annotea Ubimarks that understands this
format. I will send link to it as soon as I check couple of other things
and package it.

Right now I'm looking for feedback and ideas. The draft schema is
currently in http://www.annotea.org/schemas/2006/04/presentation.rdf
I use rdf:Seq instead of collection because Mozilla does not yet know
how to do collection.

A simple test file is located in
http://www.annotea.org/mozilla/testdata/test3.rdf

Marja

new ubimarks version 0.3.10 for firefox 1.5

2006-03-01T07:11:27Z

Pat and others,

Thanks for your interest. Here is a new ubimarks version for firefox
1.5.0.1 that I promised to put out:
http://www.annotea.org/mozilla/ubimarks_0_3_10.xpi

The xpcom package for uuid's does not work in Windows anymore (it worked
before firefox 1.5) and I haven't had time to look how to compile it
again yet. The first time was a nightmare (but used a free compiler). In
Linux there are no problems as far as I know. In case it is easy for
someone else help in compiling the component for Windows and firefox 1.5
is appreciated.

Later in the future this will not be a problem because it will be part
of mozilla/firefox (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=279521).

Now the package does work but instead of uuid's it uses http addressed
in annotea.org.
Later I hope to let user's define the http address space if they choose
to use that, I just need to check they use space that they can write to.

Marja

Re: ubimarks protocol

2005-12-26T05:05:07Z

Reto Bachmann-Gmür wrote:

>
> I've just been looking at ubimarks and can't wait (to find the time)
> to write an adaptor so bookmarks can be store on and retrieved from
> KnoBot [1]. I may have missed some documents however as I couldn't
> find description on the cleint-server protocol. Ubimarks makes an
> http-put request to store the bookmarks, does this mean that all
> bookmarks should be stored on every change, or has a way already be
> specified to only transmit a new bookmark to a server or a
> modification to the server?
>
> reto
>
> 1. http://wymiwyg.org/knobot
>

Reto,

Sorry, it took some time to answer. I was travelling and the mail got
lost in spam. I'm starting to update the protocol document now but
trying to have some holidays too.

I have done simple experiments with the server up to now treating
bookmarks pretty much as annotations. Mainly I have concentrated in the
bookmark files up to now as that was more new. I think it would be good
to discuss what else is needed in the ubimarks protocol. Maybe a
property to define chunks of bookmarks outside the topics (like the
files) but that may be different for different users and some other stuff.

There are others who are interested in collaborating with this and
promised to help with changes to the Annotea server as Eric is pretty
busy. I'll do the first version and send mail to you all hoping to have
some discussion.

Happy holidays!

Marja

ubimarks protocol

2005-12-13T01:57:27Z

I've just been looking at ubimarks and can't wait (to find the time) to
write an adaptor so bookmarks can be store on and retrieved from KnoBot
[1]. I may have missed some documents however as I couldn't find
description on the cleint-server protocol. Ubimarks makes an http-put
request to store the bookmarks, does this mean that all bookmarks should
be stored on every change, or has a way already be specified to only
transmit a new bookmark to a server or a modification to the server?

reto

1. http://wymiwyg.org/knobot