Is it going to be possible to annotate with Zotero for web?

http://zesty.ca/crit/

If I understand it correctly, with hyperaudio, one can also create transcription to somebody else's video or audio when embedded.

In that case, if you add to hyperaudio the annotation capablity of hypothes.is or docdrop, the vision outlined in the article on Global Knowledge Graph is already a reality.

Forumowe żądanie funkcji tworzenia zaznaczeń i notatek do lokalnych plików HTML w Zotero.

Historical Hypermedia: An Alternative History of the Semantic Web and Web 2.0 and Implications for e-Research. .mp3. Berkeley School of Information Regents’ Lecture. UC Berkeley School of Information, 2010. https://archive.org/details/podcast_uc-berkeley-school-informat_historical-hypermedia-an-alte_1000088371512. archive.org.

https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/events/2010/historical-hypermedia-alternative-history-semantic-web-and-web-20-and-implications-e.

https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/audio/2010-10-20-vandenheuvel_0.mp3

Interface as Thing - book on Paul Otlet (not released, though he said he was working on it)

• W. Boyd Rayward 1994 expert on Otlet
• Otlet on annotation, visualization, of text
• TBL married internet and hypertext (ideas have sex)
• V. Bush As We May Think - crosslinks between microfilms, not in a computer context
• Ted Nelson 1965, hypermedia

t=540

• Michael Buckland book about machine developed by Emanuel Goldberg antecedent to memex
• Emanuel Goldberg and His Knowledge Machine: Information, Invention, and Political Forces (New Directions in Information Management) by Michael Buckland (Libraries Unlimited, (March 31, 2006)
• Otlet and Goldsmith were precursors as well

four figures in his research: - Patrick Gattis - biologist, architect, diagrams of knowledge, metaphorical use of architecture; classification - Paul Otlet, Brussels born - Wilhelm Ostwalt - nobel prize in chemistry - Otto Neurath, philosophher, designer of isotype

Paul Otlet

• wrote bibliography on law
• book: Something on Bibliography #wanttoread
• universal decimal classification system
• mundaneum
• Le Corbusier - architect worked with Otlet for building for Mundaneum; See: https://socks-studio.com/2019/05/05/the-shape-of-knowledge-the-mundaneum-by-paul-otlet-and-henri-la-fontaine/

Otlet was interested in both the physical as well as the intangible aspects of the Mundaneum including as an idea, an institution, method, body of work, building, and as a network.<br /> (#t=1020)

Early iPhone diagram?!?

(roughly) armchair to do the things in the web of life (Nelson quote) (get full quote and source for use) (circa 19:30)

compares Otlet to TBL

Michael Buckland 1991 <s>internet of things</s> coinage - did I hear this correctly? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_of_things lists different coinages

Turns out it was "information as thing"<br /> See: https://hypothes.is/a/kXIjaBaOEe2MEi8Fav6QsA

sugane brierre and otlet<br /> "everything can be in a document"<br /> importance of evidence

The idea of evidence implies a passiveness. For evidence to be useful then, one has to actively do something with it, use it for comparison or analysis with other facts, knowledge, or evidence for it to become useful.

transformation of sound into writing<br /> movement of pieces at will to create a new combination of facts - combinatorial creativity idea here. (circa 27:30 and again at 29:00)<br /> not just efficiency but improvement and purification of humanity

put things on system cards and put them into new orders<br /> breaking things down into smaller pieces, whether books or index cards....

Otlet doesn't use the word interfaces, but makes these with language and annotations that existed at the time. (32:00)

Otlet created diagrams and images to expand his ideas

Otlet used octagonal index cards to create extra edges to connect them together by topic. This created more complex trees of knowledge beyond the four sides of standard index cards. (diagram referenced, but not contained in the lecture)

Otlet is interested in the "materialization of knowledge": how to transfer idea into an object. (How does this related to mnemonic devices for daily use? How does it relate to broader material culture?)

Otlet inspired by work of Herbert Spencer

space an time are forms of thought, I hold myself that they are forms of things. (get full quote and source) from spencer influence of Plato's forms here?

Otlet visualization of information (38:20)

S. R. Ranganathan may have had these ideas about visualization too

atomization of knowledge; atomist approach 19th century examples:S. R. Ranganathan, Wilson, Otlet, Richardson, (atomic notes are NOT new either...) (39:40)

Otlet creates interfaces to the world - time with cyclic representation - space - moving cube along time and space axes as well as levels of detail - comparison to Ted Nelson and zoomable screens even though Ted Nelson didn't have screens, but simulated them in paper - globes

Katie Berner - semantic web; claims that reporting a scholarly result won't be a paper, but a nugget of information that links to other portions of the network of knowledge.<br /> (so not just one's own system, but the global commons system)

Mention of Open Annotation (Consortium) Collaboration:<br /> - Jane Hunter, University of Australia Brisbane & Queensland<br /> - Tim Cole, University of Urbana Champaign<br /> - Herbert Van de Sompel, Los Alamos National Laboratory annotations of various media<br /> see:<br /> - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311366469_The_Open_Annotation_Collaboration_A_Data_Model_to_Support_Sharing_and_Interoperability_of_Scholarly_Annotations - http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/20130205/index.html - http://www.openannotation.org/PhaseIII_Team.html

trust must be put into the system for it to work

coloration of the provenance of links goes back to Otlet (~52:00)

Creativity is the friction of the attention space at the moments when the structural blocks are grinding against one another the hardest. —Randall Collins (1998) The sociology of philosophers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (p.76)

Which one?

Climate Feedback group (see here and here) seems to be one of these Restricted Publisher Groups. However, it doesn't seem to be "scoped to a particular domain" (see for example here, here, or here).

Is this a third configuration of Publisher Groups? Or a different kind of groups altogether? Or have these domains been enabled one by one to the Publisher Group scope? Is this behaviour explained somewhere?

In the abstract, the study cited points to "dual-task effects of fulfilling the assignment and working with the computer resulting in a higher cognitive workload".

Although this load may decrease with people getting more and more familiar with computers (and computers getting more and more intuitive), it is also the case that more distractors are available too.

This reminds me of a webinar hosted by Hypothesis in which Amanda Licastro mentioned Cathy Davidson's book "Now you see it" to talk about "Productive Multitasking". In the view that Amanda presented (at least what I understood of what she said), multitasking and distractions are unavoidable, but we can canalize them productively through web annotation, for example -instead of switching to Facebook and disconnect from what we were reading.

But do this entities have to be central, monolithic? Can't they be distributed, collaborative?

I usually like to think of the reddit model as a proposal for moderation of web annotation. Reddit is quite flexible as of what it is allowed and what it is not (this has, of course, brought heated debates in the past). But reddit has multiple reddits (as web annotation may have multiple groups or sublayers), each with a set of rules, administered and moderated by one or more people.

Do you like the moderation rules of one subreddit? You can join and even help with moderation. You don't like them? Then don't join and find another one you feel more comfortable with.

Audrey Watters blocked Genius and Hypothesis from her blog on Apr 2017: http://hackeducation.com/2017/04/26/no-annotations-thanks-bye

There were discussions about opt-out mechanisms in the Web Annotation Working group (see here), but in the end it was decided that further work would be deferred to to a future version of the specifications.

Is a good practice for hypothesis to make personal annotations first, when reading, without carefully thinking of them too much, and then, once reading is over, go back to the annotations and see which are relevant to make public and polish them a bit?

For example, I think one could sum the highlight in each specific section. If many people highlighted a passage, then the highlight color is higher. That way one would be able to discover passages that many people found important/interesting. Although, it may also bias others to do the same. As usual.

This ability is clearly reflected in 2017's W3C Web Annotation standard

This is in clear opposition to the ideas of Brust and Rothkugel in their 2007's "On Anomalies in Annotation Systems", where they claim that "a new annotation system is doomed to fail if it is based on the pen-and-paper annotation paradigm only".

In a platform where one of the main values is collaboration, how important is it that these platforms guarantee that the user will be able to backup his/her data in case he/she wants (or is forced to) move out? Shouldn't this platforms also guarantee that one would be able to download ALL public data (or data the specific user has access to) to make sure he/she will be able to recreate the whole thing if he/she wants (or is forced) to?

Annotation fulfills the future promise of the Web!

Imagine what Vannevar Bush would think of the web annotation standard--or the fact that his article has been annotated more than 270 times! But the impact of annotation is much, much bigger than one article!

The publication of this web standard changed everything. I look forward to true testing of interoperable open annotation. The publication of the standard nearly three years ago was a game changer, but the game is still in progress. The future potential is unlimited!

I was not aware of this page when the Web Annotations WG was working through its specifications. The word "Specific Resource" used in the Web Annotations Data Model Specification always seemed adequate, but now I see that it was actually quite a good fit.

Tim Berners-Lee calls for annotation in his original proposal for the web.

I concur. Diigo could have been a leader in the social annotation space, way ahead of Hypothesis. But now I think H is gaining more momentum than Diigo, because it adheres to open standards.

I think one of the ideas I'm struggling with here. Is web annotation just about research, or to advance conversation on the web? I sense this is part of decentralization too (thus, an ecosystem), but where does it fit?

Really useful session well worth your time! All the longed for teacher, student, researcher, creator & user annotation desires for the web, at long last on the way to fulfilment!

Felt way more appropriate to comment here than in the comments at the body of the page :).

It was humbling to interact act with such dedicated researchers and practitioners and to watch these documents take shape.

Thanks, everyone!

Oh my god, yes please!

Will 2017 be “the year of annotations”?

That dream does live on. Since Vannevar’s 1945 article on the Memex, we’ve been dreaming of such tools. Our current tools are quite far from that dream.

This pithy statement brings together all sorts of previous annotations. Would be neat to map them.

Die LIBREAS-Redaktion möchte gern, dass sämtliche und möglicherweise besonders dieser Artikel mit hypothes.is annotiert wird - vgl. diesen Tweet.

Il y a de belles expériences open qui sont en cours, dont celle de la revue Vertigo (tu les as peut-être vues avec le tutoriel) : open peer review avec hypothes.is

https://hypothes.is/blog/annotating-to-extract-findings-from-scientific-papers/

https://via.hypothes.is/http://vertigo.hypotheses.org/1891

et chez hypothes.is, ils travaillent avec des éditeurs scientifiques https://hypothes.is/blog/a-coalition-of-over-40-scholarly-publishers/

On en discute sur le facebook de HackYourPhD, si ça t'intéresse.

Vraiment, je suis ravi que cet outil attire ton attention !

That’s something we’ve been doing, yes.

Despite an important continuity.

Just got to think about our roles, in view of annotation. Using “curation” as a term for collecting URLs sounds like usurping the title of “curator”. But there’s something to be said about the role involved. From the whole “guide on the side” angle to the issue with finding appropriate resources based on a wealth of expertise.

Incredible that the "screenshort" hack is now getting integrated into Twitter itself. But it's still not web annotation!

Though it’s described in such a simple way, there might be hidden power in adding these tags, especially when we bring eBooks to the Semantic Web. Though books are the prime example of a “Web of Documents”, they can also contribute to the “Web of Data”, if we enable them. It might take long, but it could happen.

Useful list, almost a roadmap or set of scenarios. The last two might be especially intriguing, in view of the Semantic Web.

Ah, yes! It may sound technical to some, but there’s something very useful about deep linking which can help fulfill Berners-Lee’s Semantic Web idea much more appropriately than what is currently available. Despite so many advances in Web publishing (and the growing interest in Linked Open Data), it’s often difficult to link directly to an online item of interest. In a way, Hypothesis almost allows readers to add anchor tags to an element so it can be used in a direct link.

Well-structured annotations can pave the way towards Linked Open Data.

The “Open World Assumption” is central to this post and to the actual shift in paradigm when it comes to moving from documents to data. People/institutions have an alleged interest in protecting the way their assets are described. Even libraries. The Open World Assumption makes it sound quite chaotic, to some ears. And claims that machine learning will solve everything tend not to help the unconvinced too much. Something to note is that this ability to say something about a third party’s resource connects really well with Web annotations (which do more than “add metadata” to those resources) and with the fact that no-cost access to some item of content isn’t the end of the openness.

C’était long, en 2002! Où en est la BnF, aujourd’hui? D’une certaine façon, ce résumé semble prédire la venue des données, la fédération des catalogues, etc. Pourtant, il semble demeurer de nombreux obstacles, malgré tout ce temps. Et si on pouvait annoter le Web directement?

Post, comment, annotation… All different, but can all have the same predicate.

As long as it has some URI, it can be annotated. Any object in the world can be described through the Semantic Web. Especially with Linked Open Data.

Waiting for those to be promoted, through Hypothesis and other Open Annotations platforms.

Fine by me.

Davis, Allison P. "Sheila Heti on Drinking Her Way to a Child's-Eye View" from Department of Corrections in The Cut July 16, 2015 annotation as a correction to existing online resources such as Wikipedia

what is this resource? what does it do?

What better way to do this than taking a skill- or content-based lesson and applying it to the web as a practice through annotation.

Kartik Prabhu on marginalia on the Web.