(mail sent: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2016AprJun/0086.html)
Philippe, Ralph,
The Web Annotation Working Group requests transition to CR status for four specifications on Web Annotation. The publication is planned for the 5 of July; the documents are follows:
Abstract:
Annotations are typically used to convey information about a resource or associations between resources. Simple examples include a comment or tag on a single web page or image, or a blog post about a news article.
The Web Annotation Data Model specification describes a structured model and format to enable annotations to be shared and reused across different hardware and software platforms. Common use cases can be modeled in a manner that is simple and convenient, while at the same time enabling more complex requirements, including linking arbitrary content to a particular data point or to segments of timed multimedia resources.
The specification provides a specific JSON format for ease of creation and consumption of annotations based on the conceptual model that accommodates these use cases, and the vocabulary of terms that represents it.
Status: http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/admin/TR/annotation-model/Overview.html#h-sotd
Abstract:
The Web Annotation Vocabulary specifies the set of RDF classes, predicates and named entities that are used by the Web Annotation Data Model [annotation-model]. It also lists recommended terms from other ontologies that are used in the model, and provides the JSON-LD Context and profile definitions needed to use the Web Annotation JSON serialization in a Linked Data context.
Status: http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/admin/TR/annotation-vocab/Overview.html#h-sotd
Abstract:
Annotations are typically used to convey information about a resource or associations between resources. Simple examples include a comment or tag on a single web page or image, or a blog post about a news article.
The Web Annotation Protocol describes the transport mechanisms for creating and managing annotations in a method that is consistent with the Web Architecture and REST best practices.
Status: http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/admin/TR/annotation-protocol/Overview.html#h-sotd
https://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-annotation-minutes.html#resolution01
The separate sections of each document record the noteworthy changes.
The main input to this Working Group was the Open Annotation Data Model:
http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/
developed by a separate Community Group:
http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/
which is widely deployed (and most implementations are now converting to the output of this Working Group) and which had its own “guiding principles”:
https://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/open-annotation-guiding-principles/
An additional requirement document was the
Digital Publishing Annotation Use Cases
https://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-annotation-uc/
Finally, the group collected a few additional requirements itself:
https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Annotation_System_Requirements
The final output of the Working Group takes into account these requirements in the way the Open Annotation Vocabulary has been reused; the changes, compared to the Open Annotation Data Model, are documented at:
http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/admin/TR/annotation-model/#changes-from-previous-draft
In particular, reflecting the terms in the charter
https://www.w3.org/annotation/charter/
the list of the deliverables in the charter are fulfilled by the deliverables as follows:
The group has received and recorded a number of issues; additionally, when the Group issued a Working Draft on the 31 march 2016, it also explicitly asked for a wide review (declaring that version as some sort of a virtual LC). All the comments coming up to this transition have been addressed and resolved satisfactorily:
All issues (removing admin, postponed, testing, etc. issues):
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue
All open issues currently: - https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues
All open issues, minus on those on non rec-track notes, testing, administrative, or postponed issues:
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+-label%3Aadmin+-label%3Apostpone+-label%3Atesting+-label%3Aselector_note+-label%3Aserialization+
(http://bit.ly/1X6xqMn)
(Some issues have been postponed to a next version.)
The WG explicitly asked review from Internationalization, Accessibility, Privacy, and Security. It has received, and handled comments from:
I18n: https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3Ai18n-review
Privacy: https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3Apriv-review
Furthermore, although the group has not received explicit Accessibility review, it has decided to take over the Accessibility issues that have been added to the Open Annotation Vocabulary in its adaptation to EPUB:
http://www.idpf.org/epub/oa/
See:
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/231
Decisions on the issues, answers to, and responses from commenter are all registered in the issue threads, with pointers to the IRC logs where the resolutions were passed on the calls.
There were no formal objections.
There are two.
For the model and the vocabulary, see:
http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/admin/TR/annotation-model/#sets-of-bodies-and-targets
The issue is really a matter of understanding whether the grouping, with particular semantics, of several annotation bodies or targets leads to major implementation issues.
For the vocabulary, the extra risk is based on the dependency on Activity Streams; they should be in Rec before this document goes to Rec. As an emergency measure, the (few) classes should be defined in the Annotation namespace in case the Activity Stream document does not make it (with identical semantics).
No patent disclosures for these documents at the moment
https://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/73180/exclude
The working group intends to issue a call for implementations to demonstrate the validity of the specification.
The description of how tests are to be run is here:
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation-tests/blob/master/README.md
which refers to
https://github.com/Spec-Ops/web-platform-tests/blob/master/annotation-model/README.md
for the testing of the model & vocabulary, and to
for the protocol testing. Both, although different, rely on the general W3C testing environment.
The Working Group maintains a separate Wiki page for ongoing or pledged implementations:
https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Implementations
Note that many of those implementations already exist but are based on the Open Annotation Model (ie, the predecessor of the Web Annotation Model). They have pledged to upgrade their implementations to use the latest model, although the exact dates are not necessarily known.
Note also that the Web Annotation Vocabulary and the Open Annotation Vocabulary are very close; most of the vocabulary items are identical or have been only marginally changed. The wide deployment of the OA vocabulary proves that the vocabulary usage of those terms can already been considered as widely adopted for the WA documents as well.
Thanks
Rob Sanderson and Tim Cole, Working Group Chairs Ivan Herman and Doug Schepers, W3C Team Contacts