Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

AnnotationPage Processing Order requirements conflict #1763

Closed
azaroth42 opened this issue Dec 7, 2018 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1815
Closed

AnnotationPage Processing Order requirements conflict #1763

azaroth42 opened this issue Dec 7, 2018 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1815
Assignees
Labels
Approved-by-TRC Issue has been approved by the TRC normative presentation

Comments

@azaroth42
Copy link
Member

Prezi3 beta says:

Embedded Annotation Pages SHOULD be processed by the client first, before externally referenced pages.

And also:

Clients SHOULD process the Annotation Pages and their items in the order given in the Canvas.

So the processing model for an external Annotation Page followed by an embedded Annotation Page is at a deadlock as to which to do first, as both are SHOULD.

@azaroth42
Copy link
Member Author

Proposed resolution: Process in order of the canvas and recommend that if you want internal ones processed first, you put them first in the order.

@tomcrane
Copy link
Contributor

tomcrane commented Jan 9, 2019

👍 - much more flexible for the publisher and easier to understand for the client impl.

@azaroth42 azaroth42 added the Ready-for-TRC Normative changes ready for TRC review label Apr 17, 2019
@zimeon
Copy link
Member

zimeon commented May 9, 2019

IIIF/trc#22 approved, we can move ahead with merge of #1815

@zimeon zimeon added Approved-by-TRC Issue has been approved by the TRC and removed Ready-for-TRC Normative changes ready for TRC review labels May 9, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Approved-by-TRC Issue has been approved by the TRC normative presentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants