ISSUE-23: Should the media type of the target be stated to clarify FragmentSelector availability
Should the media type of the target be stated to clarify FragmentSelector availability
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Raised by:
- Benjamin Young
- Opened on:
- 2015-03-04
- Description:
- The topic of Annotating CSVs came up as a use case recently:
https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Annotating_CSV_Data
It is already possible to Annotate them by using CSV selectors defined in RFC 7111--which is associated with the `text/csv` media type:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7111
The current method of expressing which `oa:FragmentSelector` to use is by referencing the documentation for that selector via `dcterms:conformsTo`:
http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#fragment-selector
However, current practice and process dictates that fragment selectors be determined in relation to media type registration with IANA. Subsequent selector definitions (by extension) require a media type registration update.
As such, including the media type of a target (such as `text/csv`) would also imply how the value of `oa:FragmentSelector` should be handled.
Should the media type of the target be stated to clarify FragmentSelector availability? - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- anno-ISSUE-23: Should the media type of the target be stated to clarify FragmentSelector availability (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2015-03-04)
Related notes:
The media type of the target is able to be specified with format, and the media type(s) for the FragmentSelector is part of the RFC that specifies the syntax.
Display change log
