dokieli is a clientside editor for decentralised article publishing, annotations and social interactions https://dokie.li/
I'd like dokieli to encourage reuse / free-content, so, prefer not to default to BY-NC, BY-ND, BY-NC-SA, or BY-NC-ND.
@melvincarvalho sorry, fixed!
For example, it is not clear to me that non-SemWeb researchers are interested in adding RDFa annotations. If that is true (and this is just an hypothesis), how can we encourage them
FYI: im a sem web developer, but not researcher, and I used this system to add RDFa before, just a data point ...
nice review tho
i think in general there is a clash of worlds, the old print style linear methodology that's been in place 100s of years, and a new non linear system that is relatively new
I was just reading: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35569281
and couldnt see any immediate advantage
he's a different field, psychology
quite an interesting quote from this article: '"One of the things about digital information is that it's not fundamentally human-readable," he explains. "You need some kind of technology to turn it into something understandable."
@alangrafu what are your first impressions of Solid?
@alangrafu oh this is nuce, you made it? https://graves.cl/visualRDF/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmelvincarvalho.com%2F%23me
@melvincarvalho I made it, in 2010 I think :-)
but with nice features such as access control and realtime updates
imho how the web should have been in the first place, as a read write space, for both documents and data
hopefully dokeili will be like google docs built on top of it
ie not only for researchers
@alangrafu Thank you for your feedback! Very useful. I will try to address/incorporate the points you've raised. A quick response on versioning: this is quite a desirable feature and some of the workload will hopefully be handled by Solid. We have an issue for this in the dokieli repository already. And, mentioned provenance in the article (see the next-steps). @stain also raised this point, so I guess we were not clear about that. The revision of this article will try to discuss that better. The revision will also include an evaluation and some user testing as well.
@alangrafu I've noticed that your review is like a stand-alone article, which is great! And, I can see that you didn't use the annotation feature that's built in. The annotation is currently on a block-level i.e., you highlight some text and respond to that. We'll have the mechanism very soon to have 'reply to' the whole document - same process as the regular annotation, but there will be the UI to basically let you click on a button to reply to the whole document.
The RDFa annotation is quite preliminary at the moment IMO. We are carving that out as we go. Need to arrive at a balance between how much one can express and not to overwhelm the user. Perhaps a simple/advance view of it.. open to the ideas on this. There is a github issue already.
The key thing that's missed in your review is the relation to the article. The annotation (on a text level) does that right now.. and it sends an notification to the article's inbox "hey, there is an annotation over there about this". When the article loads, it retrieves all the notifications made to its inbox(es) and FYNs to the annotations and displays them on the article.
Maybe along the lines of "what is it like... and how is it different"?
@melvincarvalho dokieli is not only for researchers! Does it stop you or anyone from writing any (other) type of document? What makes it a "research" document? I'd like dokieli to support the features that researchers use, but none of which is something prevents or limits someone from writing blog articles or a "data-driven journal" articles.
documentation, 'about me', microblog posts, ..
by default I mean the one most commonly seen in the wild currently