Thinking back on that flurry of activity a year ago, that's what most engaged me too.

This begs to become an internet meme.

Could a biologist fix a radio?

Could a neuroscientist understand a microprocessor?

Could a heart surgeon repair a sump pump?

Etc.

The highlighting that surrounds "annotated tour" is from diff-match-patch, not Hypothesis. If this annotation weren't present that would look like it might be a Hypothesis annotation, but would yield nothing when clicked.

We have two interrelated layers of highlighting here. They ought to be rendered in ways that more clearly reflect that.

The verb develop came first to mind, lazily, because that's what we most often say. We develop software. But it's also correct to say we craft it, and that resonates better with the lead.

It was delightful. But if I haven't managed to convey that feeling already, saying so won't help.

How do I hope to have done so? In [4] we learn that a software company focused its annual conference of developers and users on the theme of observable work. Maybe you're the sort of person who finds that delightful (whether or not you live in the software world), maybe not. Either way I won't convince you by asserting that it's so. I have to point in a direction and hope you go there. If you do, you're engaged in a way not otherwise possible.

This certainly explained some things to me about my own process. I'm doubtful it's of much use to others as is. The technique shows some promise but would need lots of refinement.

In this case I used git and made frequent commits -- not quite as often as I saved, but in the end there were 72 commits.

I found a home for "intuition"!

I liked the word "intution" here, but it also felt uncomfortable. In [ 68 ] it went away, in favor of "I think"

In [ 61 ] this becomes "How might an expert writer bring those rules to the surface, reflect on them, and explain them to others?"

Much better than [ 56 ]'s overlong and passive "It's second nature for us to apply a set of rules that we've internalized." In [ 56 ]'s favor, though, it did bring in the word "apply" which had been missing.

I hope I didn't leave this in place. It's another case of asserting without demonstrating. Ah, good, I didn't, see [ 53 ].

I rethought that word in [ 36 ].

From: "Beautiful Code, in which accomplished programmers explain their thinking,"

to:

"Beautiful Code invited accomplished programmers to explain their thinking"

Why? It wouldn't have occurred to me to ask, but now that I do, I suppose because while both 9-word clauses, the second paints a picture of how Andy Oram and Greg Wilson assembled their team of authors.

More activation. From "with each iteration subject to" to "subjecting each iteration". Why don't I just internalize the rule and not need to make these adjustments?

(Can annotations such as these help train a writing assistant I would actually value?)

This was just basic hygiene. I turned a passive construct ("the crafting of prose") into an active one ("we can craft prose"). I'm not sure it's always right to do that, but it often is, and it feels right here.

Forgot to do some housekeeping.

Here's the resolution of [ 49 ]'s "It's useful to see what decisions were made." -- an almost completely vacuous sentence.

This is a strong sentence. Strong enough, I decided in [ 55 ] to open a new paragraph with it.

My FedWiki experiment happened in the past. So I matched the tense.

I switched from set (unordered) to sequence (revisions) because although the editing process is not linear -- I jump around all the time -- the revisions do occur in (and are presented as) a sequence.

Finally in [ 44 ] I arrived at "we continually revise". It took a long time to get there. It had been "constantly tweak and revise" since [ 34 ]. I like "continually" better than "constantly" because it resonates with change, not stasis. And if you're revising you're by definition tweaking, saying it twice adds nothing and so detracts.

It was a prototype, but I've been verbing that noun too much lately and decided that's becoming a bad habit.

This sentence and the next two flowed nicely.

Here I'm exploring how they might interact.

Oops, pasted to wrong window.

This is the what I had in mind. Is it interesting and useful? I'm still deciding.

Leading with Beautiful Code is stronger.

This was a roundabout way to lead into the sentence. The star of the sentence is Beautiful Code.

Again the passive crept in! I had to coerce "software can be crafted in the open" to "we can craft software in the open".

Words that add nothing actually detract. Nuke them!

I switched from "in an open way" to "in a similarly open way" to reinforce the connection between the two domains in play here: code and prose.

Wow. Jim's blog post was almost 15 years ago!

I'd rather not open with a quotation. It's best to come up with a strong original lead. But this one really nails Observable Work which is the theme I'm returning to here.

Test

What's the plausible bootstrap here?

Just thinking out loud: could a government that already binds claims to state-issued IDs transfer them to a self-issued ID in a way that would meet at least some requirements? Could those two mechanisms live side-by-side for some trial period?

Will you be attending? I hope so!

to create

way

And here we are, 50 years on, still trying to explain why this need exists and what granular addressing will enable people to do.

test

Ah, so that's where Rush came from.

It was hard to pull together the sources for this and correlate them. I spent a lot of time refinding table 14 in article foo, for example.

Doing it over again today I'd get a ton of mileage out of Hypothesis annotation.

There. Somebody finally said it.

I would think a private page is one that I keep to myself or share only with selected others.

Annotating via via

Pagenote

For example, this annotation was made at http://jonudell.net/h/farewell-01.html which declares:

<link rel="canonical" href="&lt;a href=" http:="" <a="" href="http://blog.jonudell.net" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">blog.jonudell.net="" 2015="" 05="" 13="" farewell-to-bookmarklets="" "="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://blog.jonudell.net/2015/05/13/farewell-to-bookmarklets/">

This annotation was made from http://jonudell.net/h/farewell-02.html after the deletion of

<link rel="canonical" href="&lt;a href=" http:="" <a="" href="http://jonudell.net" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">jonudell.net="" h="" farewell-01.html="" "="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://jonudell.net/h/farewell-01.html/">

Made from http://jonudell.net/h/farewell-02.html after declaring:

<link rel="canonical" href="&lt;a href=" https:="" <a="" href="http://hypothes.is" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">hypothes.is="" blog="" farewell-to-bookmarklets="" "="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://hypothes.is/blog/farewell-to-bookmarklets/">

And this annotation was made at http://jonudell.net/h/farewell-02.html which declares:

<link rel="canonical" href="&lt;a href=" http:="" <a="" href="http://jonudell.net" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">jonudell.net="" h="" farewell-01.html="" "="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://jonudell.net/h/farewell-01.html/">

Or rather, did until I deleted that declaration just now.

Yes. I'm sure that's what attracted to Hypothesis, which I do think can provide an appropriate conversational complement to FedWiki. We need ways to add layers and facets to artifacts that grow richer and deeper as we interact with them.

We think so.

This annotation made against http://blog.jonudell.net/2015/04/05/adventures-in-annotation/

Maybe what's really missing is the ability to recognize the generality in the tools we have. RSS and social tagging are two that came and went with little real appreciation for their protean capabilities.

Wise words.

As a member of the ClimateFeedback team, he contributes to the annotation of mainstream articles about climate change, for example here.

Eleven! Seems so long ago.

brave souls

battlefield

our ancestors

Not just for academics. It matters for any profession whose work processes and/or products are increasingly represented in digital form.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/2886828/collaboration-software/github-for-the-rest-of-us.html was, in retrospect, overly optimistic. GitHub scratches the surface w/respect to data types richer than lines of text (e.g. GeoJSON) but I agree with you that this won't be a priority for GitHub and will need to be addressed with very different needs front and center.

See also https://hyp.is/AVP8UKUvH9ZO4OKSlpMA/www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/5478567-181/doctors-paved-road-to-hell

See also https://hyp.is/AVP8UFdhH9ZO4OKSlpL-/hapgood.us/2016/04/01/the-opioid-epidemic/

Pretty hard, it turns out, when your dominant worldview is disruption.

And that, of course, is what education has lacked all along: insight gleaned from "big" data.

Way to disrupt education, Silicon Valley.

LTI!

Occurrences of Linux in this 1990 article: 0.

I would love to annotate that sentence with a reference!

The "culture-fit" ghetto you describe also deprives the company of access to empathy for the experiences of its user population. In the case of HubSpot those experiences may skew toward the same demographic, of course, but in general, a diversity mismatch between a company and its constituencies can't be good.

We agree!

I'd strengthen that in the following way: "It is my primary presence on the web, the only one that I control and designate as the home of my online identity."

I'd love to see this question elaborated as follows:

"atop your blog" ...

• in an annotation overlay visible only to you in your browser?

• visible to others in a private group space?

• visible on the open web?

cf http://blog.jonudell.net/2016/04/02/owning-and-sharing-your-words/

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f86L7vgHUW9wSLNNSunhjmtxtg6KlCOVpHGKbqUzW-Y

Wonderful and accurate.

test

In the spirit of play, I wish I could find a video of a dancer who is signing the lyrics of the song!

Test

test

test bridge

Annotating with frag id

Test

made me think of the title...

made me think of the title...

This number is a longitude. defined in {SCHEMA}

precede

Testing humata

Annotating a web copy.

As Paul Hawken says in Blessed Unrest, we are seeing in the breadth and diversity of the environmental movement(s) the emergence of a planetary immune system.

Anchored

Pagenote

Locally annotating test_02_march_7_2016.pdf

Annotating http://jonudell.net/h/test_01_march_7_2016.pdf

Annotating http://jonudell.net/h/plos01.pdf

The recency sort makes this much more noticeable. But, sorting the whole thread by recency is a blunt way to emphasize recent activity. We're thinking about other solutions.

Jon, actually :-)

Another kind of human/algo partnership, in that publisher /intend/ to state equivalences using metadata, but those equivalences are typically not validated by eyeballs and so are shaky.

This human/algo partnership might be the biggest deal of all.

Whether it's always ok to relay document content to analysis servers that promise only to add annotations is an untested assumption. Do we need to say more about that?

Excellent list. I might add:

• unifying scattered versions and representations by marrying automatic analysis and human curation

Add:

Annotations can be viewed and discussed using the Hypothesis client in any of its modes (Chrome extension, proxy, site-embedded).

Annotations can also be painted directly on this server's pages by means of open-source JavaScript libraries that encapsulate the Hypothesis client's core "anchoring" capability.

Annotations are available for reuse and integration by way of the Hypothesis API which delivers filter and query results, in JSON, along these facets: annotation ID, URL, user, group, tag, and freetext.

URL (and/or PDF "fingerprint')

, URL, user, group, or tag. Annotations are searchable along these facets and also by free text query.

by means of a Chrome plugin, or the same code delivered by a web proxy or embedded in a website.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36843199/Thesis-A-E-Books-and-Online-Sales-System-09-03-10

My favorite bit in this wonderful piece.

It's really worth looking up the podcast and listening to it. http://themoth.org/posts/storytellers/andrew-solomon

We are testing a notifications prototype.

I have no idea what that means, but I rather like the turn of phrase!

As in all things, rules of thumb can be over-applied. It can be so hard to step back and see that.

Thanks, Kent.

If we can crack the code on demand, I'm not sure that much new invention is needed, nor that what is needed will be particularly expensive.

Albeit according to varying terms of engagement. The web page that appears in my browser is more ephemeral than an email. But not necessarily, if I inject it into the Wayback Machine it might be (relatively) permanent.

Yes!

Even calling them places is tricky. But it's hard to think about interwoven networks: mine that I control, interwoven with yours that you control, interwoven with networks representing the agency of other individuals and organizations.

Or should be!

So true. It's analogous to SQL vs NoSQL, the latter can help solve the problem of "sharding" big data sets, but once-straightforward queries become procedural, non-standard, and demanding of "new skills"

everything is computation? http://www.cs.uni.edu/~wallingf/blog/archives/monthly/2016-01.html#e2016-01-28T14_56_44.htm

Antibody ID: AB_10562370

Target Antigen: Goat Mouse IgG (H+L) Alexa Fluor? 647

Vendor: Thermo Fisher Scientific Go To Vendor

Cat Num: A21235

Proper Citation: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A21235, RRID:AB_10562370)

Reference: PMID:25031405

Reference: PMID:25031405

Clonality: unknown

Clone ID: None

Host Organism: goat

Comments: manufacturer recommendations: mouse

resolver lookup

Antibody ID: AB_2298772

Target Antigen: Nrg1

Vendor: Millipore Go To Vendor

Cat Num: MAB377

Proper Citation: (Millipore Cat# MAB377, RRID:AB_2298772)

Reference: PMID:16680766,PMID:16680782,PMID:16705673,PMID:16705682,PMID:16736475,PMID:16786555,PMID:16856135,PMID:16856175,PMID:16871537,PMID:16958104,PMID:17111361,PMID:17120294,PMID:17311320,PMID:17311323,PMID:17335037,PMID:17348014,PMID:17348018,PMID:17444497,PMID:17990272,PMID:17990275,PMID:18022946,PMID:18067150,PMID:18092335,PMID:18095323,PMID:18196540,PMID:18271024,PMID:18273885,PMID:18288691,PMID:18335562,PMID:18383051,PMID:18386786,PMID:18404667,PMID:18551525,PMID:18615557,PMID:18634004,PMID:18697194,PMID:18698599,PMID:18709662,PMID:18720412,PMID:18770870,PMID:18785627,PMID:18853423,PMID:18925632,PMID:18973275,PMID:19003903,PMID:19058187,PMID:19058188,PMID:19226508,PMID:19296475,PMID:19330822,PMID:19350644,PMID:19363795,PMID:19363802,PMID:19399893,PMID:19399895,PMID:19412934,PMID:19459218,PMID:19479992,PMID:19480001,PMID:19496176,PMID:19827160,PMID:19844997,PMID:19882721,PMID:19924828,PMID:19937713,PMID:19950118,PMID:20034056,PMID:20187140,PMID:20503425,PMID:20506477,PMID:20533358,PMID:20533365,PMID:20575070,PMID:20575073,PMID:20593361,PMID:20653028,PMID:20653035,PMID:20737593,PMID:20853508,PMID:20853510,PMID:20886617,PMID:20886626,PMID:20963823,PMID:20963826,PMID:21031559,PMID:21120924,PMID:21165980,PMID:21246550,PMID:21246554,PMID:21344400,PMID:21452201,PMID:21452234,PMID:21456003,PMID:21456007,PMID:21456011,PMID:21674491,PMID:21674497,PMID:21681751,PMID:21800304,PMID:22020803,PMID:22120979,PMID:22134929,PMID:22173709,PMID:22252518,PMID:22323214,PMID:22351306,PMID:22430145,PMID:22434575,PMID:22473338,PMID:22605579,PMID:22628012,PMID:22628090,PMID:22684983,PMID:22700217,PMID:22778007,PMID:22829396,PMID:22886938,PMID:23124836,PMID:23172137,PMID:23296594,PMID:23322491,PMID:23508745,PMID:23602964,PMID:23623813,PMID:23682015,PMID:23749483,PMID:24668417,PMID:25009276,PMID:25031405,PMID:25048050,PMID:25100604,PMID:25160573,PMID:25305665

Reference: PMID:16680766

Clonality: monoclonal antibody

Clone ID: None

Host Organism: mouse

Comments: We can any commentsUseful for western blot, immunoprecipitation, immunohistochemistry, immunocytochemistry

resolver lookup

Antibody ID: AB_10563770

Target Antigen: Goat Chicken IgG (H+L) Alexa Fluor? 488

Vendor: Thermo Fisher Scientific Go To Vendor

Cat Num: A11039

Proper Citation: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A11039, RRID:AB_10563770)

Reference: PMID:25031405

Reference: PMID:25031405

Clonality: unknown

Clone ID: None

Host Organism: goat

Comments: manufacturer recommendations: chicken, avian, bird

resolver lookup

Antibody ID: AB_10000240

Target Antigen: GFP See NCBI gene

Vendor: Aves Labs Go To Vendor

Cat Num: GFP-1020

Proper Citation: (Aves Labs Cat# GFP-1020, RRID:AB_10000240)

Reference: PMID:16958092,PMID:18386786,PMID:19003791,PMID:19003874,PMID:19711380,PMID:19827160,PMID:19882715,PMID:19950390,PMID:20235095,PMID:21120924,PMID:21452201,PMID:21452247,PMID:21674487,PMID:21858821,PMID:22120520,PMID:22315167,PMID:22434575,PMID:22473338,PMID:22522945,PMID:22592759,PMID:22605619,PMID:22605640,PMID:22791192,PMID:22987798,PMID:23787922,PMID:24825838,PMID:25031405

Reference: PMID:16958092

Clonality: polyclonal antibody

Clone ID: None

Host Organism: chicken

Comments: Immunohistochemistry, 1:2500-1:5000 Western Blot.

resolver lookup

Database: IMSR

Species: Mouse

Name: FVB-Tg(GadGFP)45704Swn/J

Background: None

Affected Gene: Gad1

Genomic Alteration: Gad1

Phenotype: None

Notes: gene symbol note: glutamate decarboxylase 1 coisogenic strain, mutant strain glutamate decarboxylase 1

Reference:

Availability: live mouse

Catalog ID: JAX:003718

Proper Citation: RRID:IMSR_JAX:003718

resolver lookup

Database: IMSR

Species: Mouse

Name: CB6-Tg(Gad1-EGFP)G42Zjh/J

Background: None

Affected Gene: Tg(Gad1-EGFP)G42Zjh

Genomic Alteration: Tg(Gad1-EGFP)G42Zjh

Phenotype: None

Notes: gene symbol note: transgene insertion G42, Z Josh Huang mutant stock transgene insertion G42, Z Josh Huang

Reference:

Availability: live mouse

Catalog ID: JAX:007677

Proper Citation: RRID:IMSR_JAX:007677

resolver lookup

Database: IMSR

Species: Mouse

Name: ICR.Cg-Gad1^tm1.1Tama/Rbrc

Background: None

Affected Gene: Gad1

Genomic Alteration: tm1.1Tama

Phenotype: None

Notes: gene symbol note: glutamic acid decarboxylase 1 mutant stock targeted mutation 1.1, Nobuaki Tamamaki

Reference:

Availability: live mouse

Catalog ID: RBRC03674

Proper Citation: RRID:IMSR_RBRC03674

resolver lookup

Database: IMSR

Species: Mouse

Name: B6;129S-Gt(ROSA)26Sor^{tm34.1(CAG-Syp/tdTomato)Hze}/J

Background: None

Affected Gene: Gt(ROSA)26Sor

Genomic Alteration: tm34.1(CAG-Syp/tdTomato)Hze

Phenotype: None

Notes: gene symbol note: gene trap ROSA 26, Philippe Soriano mutant stock targeted mutation 34.1, Hongkui Zeng

Reference:

Availability: live mouse

Catalog ID: JAX:012570

Proper Citation: RRID:IMSR_JAX:012570

resolver lookup

Database: IMSR

Species: Mouse

Name: B6;129S6-Gt(ROSA)26Sor^{tm9(CAG-tdTomato)Hze}/J

Background: None

Affected Gene: Gt(ROSA)26Sor

Genomic Alteration: tm9(CAG-tdTomato)Hze

Phenotype: None

Notes: gene symbol note: gene trap ROSA 26, Philippe Soriano mutant stock targeted mutation 9, Hongkui Zeng

Reference:

Availability: live mouse

Catalog ID: JAX:007905

Proper Citation: RRID:IMSR_JAX:007905

resolver lookup

Database: IMSR

Species: Mouse

Name: B6;129S-Gt(ROSA)26Sor^{tm32(CAG-COP4*H134R/EYFP)Hze}/J

Background: None

Affected Gene: COP4

Genomic Alteration: COP4

Phenotype: None

Notes: gene symbol note: Channelrhodopsin mutant stock Channelrhodopsin

Reference:

Availability: live mouse

Catalog ID: JAX:012569

Proper Citation: RRID:IMSR_JAX:012569

resolver lookup

resolver lookup

I wonder if we could add:

The Internet is the computer. Clouds (plural: Amazon's, Google's, Microsoft's) are operating systems that run on it.

interoperable :-)

Thanks to Greg McVerry for this great question!

In Behind the Dream, MLK's lawyer, friend, and adviser Clarence Jones writes:

What amazed me was that there was absolutely no reference material for Martin to draw upon. There he was [in the Birmingham jail] pulling quote after quote from thin air. The Bible, yes, as might be expected from a Baptist minister, but also British prime minister William Gladstone, Mahatma Gandhi, William Shakespeare, and St. Augustine.

Actually he seems to have misremembered Gladstone and Shakespeare, but might also have included: Thomas Acqinas, Margin Buber, Pauil Tillich, T.S. Eliot, Reinhold Neibuhr. Martin Luther, John Bunyan, Abraham Lincoln

Jones continues:

I have often said the sheer processing power of Martin’s mind left me awestruck. His dexterity with memory and words ran along the lines of the cut-and-paste function in today’s computer programs. The “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” showed his recall for the written material of others; his grueling schedule of speeches illuminated his ability to do the same for his own words. Martin could remember exact phrases from several of his unrelated speeches and discover a new way of linking them together as if they were all parts of a singular ever-evolving speech. And he could do it on the fly.

MLK kept all these sources in working memory, available for instant retrieval and for agile recombination.

Nowadays we outsource that working memory to the web. What thoughts are harder for us to think? What statements are harder for us to make, especially extemporaneously and without notes?

I try to make a habit of breaking habits :-)

I'd replace "can also" with "necessarily"

A key question. To help answer it I have been exploring a tool that isolates and displays just the annotations for an article.

You can find a static version of that view, for the article that was the subject of your flashmob, at http://jonudell.net/h/flashmob-skills-and-strategies.html.

The live version -- which will work for any H-annotated article -- is http://h.jonudell.info:8080/annos_for_url?url=http%3A%2F%2Flearning.blogs.nytimes.com%2F2015%2F11%2F12%2Fskills-and-strategies-annotating-to-engage-analyze-connect-and-create%2F

This is purely an exploration, at this point, that serves a few different needs for me, including viewing, debugging, and exporting annotations.

But I am very interested in how tools that present the annotation layer in ways complementary to our primary view (i.e. anchored to the text) can help with curation and sensemaking.

Indeed . We are operating in a new medium, I'm also very much in the mode of noticing and naming.

This was a remarkable experience. There were about 30 of us annotating the transcript while watching the speech. Some fact-checked, some analyzed the rhetoric, many reacted and discussed. All that activity was happening in realtime, anchored to passages of text. For us at Hypothesis it validated what we know: collaborative annotation -- especially in realtime -- is a powerful mode of discourse.

RIP