Re: Problems with replies ...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I would prefer to keep the protocol smaller and have replies only as 
special type of annotations designed to annotate annotations. In the 
description of http://www.w3.org/2000/10/annotationType#reply it could 
be specified that annotea clients are expected to display replies as 
thread.

cheers

Reto

Lunedì, 3 Mar 2003, alle 17:12 Europe/Paris, Charles McCathieNevile ha 
scritto:

>
> So are replies a subtype of annotation (or should they be?) which have 
> a
> specific treatment in Amaya, and for which there is a recommendation 
> that the
> thread of replies is made available in presenting the annotations?
>
> I realise that there are not 'requirements' on how user agents should 
> present
> annotations to users, but it might be worthwhile discussing what are
> appropriate ways to present the basic barts of the core protocols 
> (e.g. that
> a:annotations are expected to be simple annotations, and replies are 
> intended
> to be threaded...) ?
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Jose Kahan wrote:
>
>>
>> Hello Reto,
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 07:11:23PM +0100, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote:
>>
>>> I didn't yet try to implement the reply protocol. To be honest I 
>>> don't
>>> understand the need for this, why not just annotate annotations?
>>
>> Nothing keeps you from annotation an annotation. An annotation is
>> a resource and it has a URL. We support this in Amaya since long time
>> ago.
>>
>> You can see an annotation as a way of making a remark about something.
>> A reply allows people to respond to those remarks. This is similar
>> to what we have on email. The reply threads allow you to better
>> organize the discussion and visualize it.
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (Darwin)

iD8DBQE+ZMpgD1pReGFYfq4RApKkAKDP7Q5kWf1zpmjoCG87RjCQFObisgCfYz+w
321lHocNqMwJLF9GsSAHmJg=
=zvvP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----