"notes" annotation property is currently only applicable to table

[6a6d74]

The metadata vocab doc section 3.5 Tables identifies the (optional) notes property that may be used to carry an array of annotations.

It would seem appropriate that this is an optional property for table-groups and columns too.

Individual cells could be identified as the target of a given annotation (aka note) - so I don't think a notes property on individual cells is warranted.

[iherman]

On 27 Nov 2014, at 14:48 , Jeremy Tandy notifications@github.com wrote:

The metadata vocab doc section 3.5 Tables identifies the (optional) notes property that may be used to carry an array of annotations.

It would seem appropriate that this is an optional property for table-groups and columns too.

Individual cells could be identified as the target of a given annotation (aka note) - so I don't think a notes property on individual cells is warranted.

Actually, we do not have cell level (or row level) metadata any more. One more reason not to have that:-)

Ivan

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

---

Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704

[6a6d74]

I propose that the notes property is available for table-groups and columns in addition to tables.

Table-groups because we might want to make assertions about a group of tables.

Columns because, although I could make a note at the table level that had a given column (or cell) as the annotation target, ...

1. it seems appropriate to try to keep the annotations closer to where they apply
2. this also covers the case where a column is within a schema that is reused across many tables (in which case I would need to be making a note about the column rather than specific table data).

[iherman]

From a usability point of view I see the point. That being said: we agreed to use the annotation model, meaning that the value of a "note" is (an array of) an annotation structure; this latter contains an explicit "target" for the annotation (in our case, we also agreed to use a RFC fragment ID). In this sense, where the "note" property resides is independent from its position within the metadata file.

Ivan

On 02 Dec 2014, at 20:20 , Jeremy Tandy notifications@github.com wrote:

I propose that the notes property is available for table-groups, tables and columns.

• Table-groups because we might want to make assertions about a group of tables.
• Columns because, although I could make a note at the table level that had a given column (or cell) as the annotation target, ...

1. it seems appropriate to try to keep the annotations closer to where they apply
2. this also covers the case where a column is within a schema that is reused across many tables (in which case I would need to be making a note about the column rather than specific table data).

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

---

Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704

[6a6d74]

Having thought about this a little more I think that I'm fine with notes only being applicable to Tables. The target of the structured annotations in a notes object is the tabular data. We make statements about Table-Groups, Tables, Schema and Columns directly within the metadata description (Direct Annotations).

[JeniT]

Closing given @6a6d74 who raised the issue is now happy with the status quo.