Re: Annotea's context property

Jose Kahan wrote:
> The value of the context is a literal, not a resource. It looks like a URI, 
> but it could have any other value.
> 
> I think that the previous draft of the protocol had an error and was
> showing the value of the context as a resource. 
> 
> I've some net problems so I can't verify the Annotea RDF schema to see
> how we declared the context there or if there's an ambiguity.
> 
> In all cases, it is a literal.  The ZAnnot server is correct.

Doh!  I should pay more attention to the list.  For some reason I had 
gotten the impression that it was supposed to be a resource, so I 
changed it for 0.4rc1.  I'll change it back, though, if it's really 
supposed to be a literal.

For my future reference, how do you determine whether something is a 
resource or a literal from the schema? 
http://www.w3.org/2000/10/annotation-ns defines 'context' (a literal) 
and 'annotates' (a resource), as:

<rdf:Property rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/annotation-ns#context">
   <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">context</rdfs:label>
   <rdfs:comment>The context within the resource named in 'annotates' to 
which the Annotation most directly applies.</rdfs:comment>
   <rdfs:isDefinedBy 
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/annotation-ns#"/>
</rdf:Property>

<rdf:Property rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/annotation-ns#annotates">
   <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">annotates</rdfs:label>
   <rdfs:comment>Relates an Annotation to the resource to which the 
Annotation applies.  The inverse relation is 'hasAnnotation'</rdfs:comment>
   <rdfs:isDefinedBy 
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/annotation-ns#"/>
</rdf:Property>

To me these look pretty much the same.  Am I missing something?

--Brent