ods:type: why does it exist for AnnotationTarget but not Annotation

[DavidFichtmueller]

Term Name

ods:type

Digital Object Name

Annotation

Feedback

All of the FDO types, have a class with the same name, that is the "core" class of the FDO. All of those core classes have a property ods:ID and ods:type , with the exception of Annotation. Here both Annotation and AnnotationTarget have an ods:ID, which would imply that the AnnotationTarget itself could also be served as an FDO. The Annotation itself has a property rdf:type for its compatibility with the W3C Web Annotation model. I am not sure if this is an error or a deliberate decisions not to add the ods:type property to the Annotation class. Technically it would be possible to have two different properties with the same local name but different namespaces connected to a class. It might be a bit confusing for a user, but for a machine it wouldn't be an issue.

Also if the property is renamed as suggested in #160 , then this ambiguity could be avoided completely.

[samleeflang]

Hi David,
We added ods:fdoType to the ods:Annotation object. As you indicated, the name ambiguity has been resolved because we followed your recommendation in #160.
Just to clarify, the AnnotationTarget works a bit differently. It indicates what the target of the AnnotationBody is. So the ID and the type in this object refer to the ID and type of the target (so for example a DigitalSpecimen). It can not be used separately as an FDO in itself.