Skip to content

Reply to ‘What should we build’, 23 Apr

Reply to the 22 April 2018 version of  


  • ‘Augmented HTML’ sounds really great but I’m concerned it will be confused with HTML for AR. What do you think? Maybe some other term like expanded HTML? Can we maybe tie in Rich PDF with this? It is simply so that we have a wrapper for this which can be opened by any legacy PDF reader. Or are we committing to work fully with the web, rather than documents? Or is this question off-track?
  • Questions related to Author’s role in the Scenario:#

  • “search for annotations”. Does this mean searching automatically? Is it based on the text in the paragraph?”Going the other way, once a given annotation is linked to from Liquid | Author, the annotation can be updated to contain a back link to the specific paragraph within Liquid | Author as a federated knowledge source.”
  • Does this mean that annotations also include citations in this model?
  • Should the hyperglossary workflow mirror that of annotations?
  • Suggestions, which we can all chip in with:#

  • I think the document should define Live Knowledge Components. I love the term but what is it? “Write a Knowledge converter that can convert the user’s annotations into a live knowledge object” hints but it would be good to have a description. Sorry if I missed it.
  • The Hyperglossary should also be further defined.
  • I wonder if we should spend some time to discuss the ‘Publish’ Process. I think this is a very important step which we should likely spend an hour on.
  • So what are the explicit benefits in Doug Terms? #

    I suggest: 

  • Structured documents (xFiles)
  • High res address via hypothesis
  • Rich ViewSpecs should listed in there I think
Published inDougDemo@50

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.