Research
From Fisheye
We need to thoroughly research earlier attempts at web annotation, learn their highlights and lowlights. It doesn't seem that any became widely used... why is that?
Briefly skimming, it seems one of the biggest problems was usability. Client was implemented in a specialized browser, discussion threads opened in chains of popup windows, etc. These days we have many examples of clean, functional web interfaces: Google maps, Flickr, and many other sites.
Most of these projects seem to be either academic efforts (many focused on the problems of semantics and categorizing online information) or commercial ventures that never went cash positive.
Perhaps a more focused effort, tackling a specific problem, could succeed.
Contents |
Overview
Wikipedia Web Annotation Article with a pretty exhaustive list of previous annotation systems.
Current Open Systems
Annotea is a W3C project for a Web Annotation system built on standards such as RDF and XPointer(scroll down). Explicitly mentions "peer groups" sharing a pool of notes. Started in 2001. As was typical, implemented in a custom browser - in this case the W3C's showcase browser Amaya. Because it defines a server interface, server code is available and a test server is online, Annotea is something of a standard itself.
Annotea's RDF Schema is nearly identical to geoff's notes on the Fisheye database, and can be easily extended.
IF Annotea can accomodate a system like Fisheye, then it is very likely we want to build Fisheye against it. The server component would be complete, with a test server already avilable and code to set up Fisheye's own server when the time comes. The big unknown, is whether we can store all the fisheye-specific data (submitter, classification, source, etc] on the annotea server (most likely in RDF). Building on Annotea also gives us standards to program against, libraries to handle those standards, and existing clients to extend with support for fisheye-specific data.
Annozilla is probably the current best candidate for a serious open annotation system. It is an Annotea-compatible annotation system implemented as extension for mozilla and firefox (specifically relying on mozilla's libraries for supporting W3C standards). Displayed as a sidebar. Supports replies to annotations in a "threaded" display. See the Mozilla Screenshots for the interface.
Annozilla is implemented to be compatible with Annotea. Annozilla's examples even run against the w3c annotea test server. Annozilla is working to be compatible with notes left with the Amaya browser.
Cons: implemented as browser plugin, current display is sidebar, don't see concepts of channels, very generic rather than targetted towards media criticism.
Pros: open source, can grab the code and hack it! Very standards-compliant. Fisheye-specific features can likely be added via RDF, and the plugin hacked to load Fisheye specific data and render it.
|
You should install Annozilla for Firefox and give it a try. Follow these installation instructions, using the "local server" option when configuring. View->Sidebar->Annozilla to open the sidebar, highlight some text in a web page and add a comment via the Annotations dropdown on the sidebar, reload the page. |
shiftspace is an active open project using greasemonkey. There is even a commisions program, up to US$2000 to build something like Fisheye on top of their API.
fisheye requirements re: shiftspace
- dead simple to install w/ no mandatory configuration. can require dependent firefox plugins but no manual configuration
- must be always on from install, no interaction (shift-space) required to view highlights,popups
- must not require an account to view
- must be able to support large bandwidth efficiently, go public immediately
- does it support annotea or underlying standards such as XPointer? what is strategy for canonical URLs, split pages, etc?
- distinct fisheye client interface so the data might be accessed by clients other than shiftspace?
Commercial Systems
Warichu claims to be extensible via open API to handle different types of metadata/markups, each type dubbed a "Chew". There are even open source projects to create new types of user markup, such as Collaborative Chew. The two types currently available in the demo are Collaborative (notes that others can add to) and Highlight (tied to part of the text; broken on Firefox on XP) There are plugins for IE and FireFox, although the demo works without installing anything. Apparently the system is proprietary but legally compatible with open source plugins. However the system is prorietary - no way to run own server, if warichu goes out of business the system goes with it. Entry point is a link to warichu.com. Implementation is an overlaid button in upper right which opens a floating sidebar to add and edit notes, and whatever Chews are tied to the page display however they do... Collaborative is a floating yellow text window.
Pros: ability to implement a Chew specific to fisheye is very appealing... some framework is in place, many problems have been solved, and the Fisheye Chew could be very direct and specific to Fisheye's mission.
Cons: All Chews are plugged into the Warichu button/sidebar, no way to have a standalone Fisheye experience. Entry points are link to warichu.com (maybe browser plugins load markups automatically on page load?)
Judgement: In the end, proprietary framework is unacceptable on principle, because Fisheye would die with the company.
JumpKnowledge is a .com. Not too far from what we need - their
example page even shows the system used for political criticism. It seems genuinely useful in a non-collaborative way - the typical use case is to see something, comment on it, then post link in your blog. I couldn't find a way to add notes to an already annotated page. Doesn't appear to support the idea of channels applied to whatever you are browsing. Need to use a link to jkn.com as entry to critiqued page. Layout: nice small frame at top with info on annotation system. Comments are always visible, inline, not easy on the eyes.
They have an interesting split-screen interface for adding notes. Try it yourself - the example page has buttons at the top to make your own annotated version of the page.
Cons: commercial, non-collaborative
Pros: decent inline display which could be implemented via proxy, web interface for adding notes
Fleck is a commercial venture very similar to jumpknowledge but with a slick web 2.0 vibe to it. Again, commercial and seems to be non-collaborative: email or blog a link to fleck.com which displays the marked up page. Check out the implementation by selecting one of the Examples from the bottom of the page. Implementation is a floating toolbar which scrolls with page to always stay visible (like some annoying ads do)
|
You should try all three commercial service's demo pages: |
Recent Student Efforts
Annotate The Web is a recent student project, sidebar similar to Annozilla but cleaner appearance
Marginalia is another recent student effort, also with a cleaner interface.
Older and Adademic Systems
A great Overview Of Web Annotation Systems from 1999, most of the "Tried And Failed" variety. Outlines a number of common and differentiating features of these systems. Perhaps the most relevant of these is CritLink Mediator, "a Web-based annotation system developed by Ka-Ping Yee at the University of Waterloo" which sports fairly similar design and goals. Elsewhere I have read it has been defunct since 2003.
Another overview from 1999, also with a nice table comparing implementations. Particularly note the Executor, Anchor, and Presentations that have been used in prior systems.
SemanticWeb has a page of Web annotation tools Here. The focus of most is more on describing and cataloging online data, than on debate or corrections.
