search

adobe / xdm

Experience Data Model
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
245 stars 315 forks source link

Define collaboration comments/annotations #7

Open trieloff opened 6 years ago

trieloff commented 6 years ago

From the discussion in #53 an important side-track has spun up:

Also, comments (which you have in content) are a completely separate thing (aka neither content nor asset) that I am working to define (as part of the Collaboration pieces of ACP). A comment (not unlike a layer or artboard) is a container for content/assets, not a type of either. FYI: The basis for the model for comment is https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/ - the W3C standard model for annotations/comments on which the ACP commenting system (aka RedHawk) is based. — @lrosenth

This is coming just at the right time, because the type of comment that I had in mind when I suggested /content/usergenerated-comment.schema.json is a type of user generated content that you would make as a reader in response to a blog post or facebook post. (the stuff that people refer to when they say "always skip the comments")

The type of comment that @lrosenth seems to have in mind is more an editorial comment that is part of the production of an asset (but can also be applied to content, as illustrated by annotations in AEM).

It is clear that we have another example of the duality that we've already seen between @noahe's collaboration profile and @kstreete's customer/visitor profile.

Let's identify the commonalities and differences between the approaches taken in collaboration systems and moderation systems and define a schema for collaboration comments/annotations.

lrosenthol commented 6 years ago

One thing that DC is doing right now is defining a review - the "container" for a collaboration workflow. We aren't (as noted in #8) doing the actual comments but are defining the people, roles, metadata, etc.