It’s probably really important to point out that nothing I’m going to lay out today is at all original, or even very recent. Far from it.Case In point, The Talmud, which has been around for the last several thousand years.The Talmud is the compilation of the Mishnah and the Gemara.The Mishna– the original oral history in the middle, is surrounded by interpretation, argument and commentary which is often threaded. In addition there are footnotes and off-page cross references.This is post-publication peer-review in its earliest form. http://www.beverlyhillschabad.com/TEXT/GEMARA/gemara-rosh-hashana-2-10/gemara-rosh-hashana-2a.jpg
Despite early models of review--- scholarly publication for most of the last several thousand years has been done without any formal pre-publication review process. It was the scarcity of people capable of research—not to mention the difficulty of publication-- that was the primary check on the spread of new ideas. Coperncus was also a member of the order of Jesuits, which served as an early society that legitimized the work of its membership. Even so– Copernicus waited until his death to publish his most controversial work. Precisely in order to avoid what was unlikely to be a favorable review of his peers.http://ouhos.org/2012/04/30/new-exhibit-the-copernican-century/
Though theGutenberg Press was far from the first press, its simplicity and ubiquity revolutionized the availability of printed material to ordinary people. It’s this tension between the ease of distribution and theSpier 2002 – The history of the peer review process
In 1752 the Royal Society took over the editing functions for the Philosophical Transactions, and instituted a process made popular by the Royal Society of Edinburgh as early as 1731--- where materials sent to it were made available to a select group of editors. This is the same issue incidentally, where Ben Franklin first describes his experiment with a kite and key.
Around the turn of the last century, the typewriter and then the carbon copy made it easy to circulate drafts of papers to committeesImage credit http://www.officemuseum.com/1913_Victoria_Copying_Machine.jpgFromSpier 2002 – The history of the peer-review process
In fact, changes in technology– particularly around the ease and expense of duplication, have not only accelerated distribution, but have really defined the way by which broad review can be facilitated.Image credit http://revolution-21.blogspot.com/2010/03/xerox-machines-50th-anniversary-paper.htmlFromSpier 2002 – The history of the peer-review process
Which brings us to the Internet … theimpact and the latent potential for transformation of which cannot be overstated. And we’ve only begun to scratch the surface.This image that was produced by mapping all the IP addresses accessed on a single day.http://blyon.com/blyon-cdn/opte/maps/static/1105841711.LGL.2D.4000x4000.png
What I didn’t know at the time was how many people had had the same idea.
funding via Kickstarter and $500k Sloan Grant
A great product, with a simple, easy to use interface A reputation model that is emergent… A peer-discovery model that effectively matches meta-moderators Functional across the Internet
The story about what a journal charges
How do we link on the net now? Once and to the top.
But with an annotation, our blogger can now link within the document instead. And the annotation can serve as a kind of footnote. Because we’re able to link to specific targets, we’re able to connect ideas for the first time.
Instead of just linking once, we can begin to link more richly…
connecting multiple concepts and ideas.
It can be anything. Any kind of media, movies, pdfs, pictures, even data. As long as it has an address or a signature that we can point to or reference.
It can be anything. Any kind of media, movies, pdfs, pictures, even data. As long as it has an address or a signature that we can point to or reference.http://itee.uq.edu.au/~eresearch/annocryst-pymol.php
Beyond the text of the annotation itself, though, it may make sense to make the sentiment clearer– more explicit—by tagging or classifying that sentiment. Because there are all kinds of reasons we might want to make an annotation. Linguists call this a “stance marker”.
Which is useful when we have lots of annotations made by lots of different folks. We can begin to see how sentiment is clustered.
That could allow the creation of a heatmap that helps us understand weighted sentiment as we move through documents– and then dive in deeper to understand the detail behind it. A heatmap isn’t a substitute for reading the detail collapsed behind it– but it does help us understand where we should dive in to explore more detail.This is what we’re working on now.
It’s important to remember something really fundamental.
Oh, yes… and it needs to be fun– in other words, if its not delightful to use… people won’t.
All we’re trying to do is enable conversations… but in order to do that at scale on the Internet, we need a squelch knob.For those of you who are ham radio operators, you may be familiar with the squelch knob. It lets you set a noise floor, a signal floor, below which you hear nothing. Pure silence. And above which you hear the transmission. For us, spam and what are affectionately known as obvious trolls– those who have no interest in participating constructively in a conversation– fall below that noise threshold. We will use primarily identity based techniques like two-factor authentication to provide a squelch knob function there. Above that is where helpful conversation is taking place. There we’ll use meta-moderation techniques to expand headroom in the signal of quality conversation.I’ll talk a little more about how we implement that later.
Understanding Critical Elements of E-books: The Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations
http://www.niso.org/news/events/2012/nisowebinars/ebooks_social_reading/ Understanding Critical Elements of E-books: The Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations September 12, 2012 Speakers: Todd Carpenter, Rob Sanderson, Dan Whaley
• INSERT EACH OF THE SPEAKER PRESENTATIONS, IN THE ORDER THEY ARE LISTED ON THE WEBSITE 2
Annotating the Web with W3C Open Annotations Robert Sanderson firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com Los Alamos National Laboratory @azaroth42 (W3C Open Annotation Co-Chair) http://www.openannotation.org/ http://www.w3c.org/community/open annotationThis research was funded, in part, by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 29 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Open Annotation• Communities• Annotation, E-Books and the Web• Core Open Annotation Model• Extended Model: Specific Resources• The Road Ahead Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 30 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Open Annotation and the W3C• Open Annotation Collaboration (focus: humanities, web) • LANL, UIUC, Queensland, MITH, plus others• Annotation Ontology (focus: science) • Harvard, Manchester, plus others• Models merged November 2011-March 2012 • Basis of W3C Open Annotation Community Group • Next f2f meeting: September 18-19, Chicago • http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation• Open to all • Please join in the discussion! Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 31 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Social, Digital Annotation• NISO Working Group on Digital Annotation • Apple, Adobe, IDPF, EBSCO, Sony, hypothes.is, … • 3 Meetings (New York, San Franciso, Frankfurt) • Introduced and reinforced several requirements: • Need to be able to specify how to render the annotation • Issues with text quoting and book reconstruction • Challenges with text segments: • Robustness in the face of change • Precision of the selection Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 32 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Further Community• International Image Interoperability Framework • Stanford, Oxford, Cornell, BL, BNF, KB, Natl. Library of Norway, UK Natl. Archives, ArtStor, …• Digital Medieval Manuscript Interoperability Forum • As IIIF, plus Drew, St Louis, Ghent, Meertens Institute, …• Close Ties to: • W3C Provenance WG • schema.org • NLP Interchange Format group Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 33 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
E-Books and the Web• Web formats are E-Book formats • Epub is just HTML5 • Apps/Sites and E-Books are moving closer together• E-Books are not just Text! • Video or audio comments • … about embedded images, 3-d models• Multiple targets for a single annotation • Compare/Contrast, grouping, …• Fine grained region of interest is crucial • Particular word in text, letter depicted in image … Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 34 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Basic Model An RDFDocument The What TheComment Comment is About http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/ Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 35 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Basic ModelSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 36 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Annotation Types Class DescriptionBookmark Marker at (a point in) a resourceChange Request for modificationClassification Assignment of a classComment Commentary or ReviewDescription Description of, rather than about targetHighlight Highlighted (section of a) resourceLink Relationship of unspecified semanticsModeration Assignment of value or qualityQuestion Question about targetReference Citation or reference pointer for targetReply Response to previous statementTag A tag on target resource, often textual Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 37 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Annotation TypesSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 38 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Multiple TargetsSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 39 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Further Specification of ResourcesSpecific Body and Specific Target resources identify the region ofinterest, and/or the state of the resource.Need to be able to describe the state of the resource, the segment of interest, and potentially styling hints for how to render it.We introduce two Specifiers: Selector Describes how to select segment State Describes how to retrieve representation(Where did Style go? It’s moving to the Annotation in next draft) Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 40 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Specific TargetSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 41 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Offset Text SelectorSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 42 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Quotation Text SelectorSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 43 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Fragment SelectorSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 44 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Further Features• Embedding resources • Embedding body, specifiers, styles for transport• Semantic and Data Annotations • Semantic tags, annotating data, data as commentary• Provenance of Annotation • Versioning • Equivalence • Archiving • Annotator / Generator distinction Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 45 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
The Road Ahead• September face to face • Resolve open questions• October-December • Revised Draft• 2013 • Final Draft • Look at moving to W3C Working Group structure • Towards standards track / recommendation status Social Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 46 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Thank You Robert Sanderson firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com @azaroth42 Web: http://www.openannotation.org/ http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/ http://www.shared-canvas.org/ Slides: http://www.slideshare.net/azaroth42/niso-annotation-webinarSocial Reading Experience of Sharing Bookmarks and Annotations 47 September 12th 2012, NISO Webinar
Gutenberg invented the [modern] printing press, and so what was printed could now be distributed and affect otherwise docile citizens or subjects. It therefore became important to regulate that which was set before the public.Spier 2002 – The history of the peer review process