Skip to main content

Biomedical and Electrical Engineer with interests in information theory, evolution, genetics, abstract mathematics, microbiology, big history, IndieWeb, mnemonics, and the entertainment industry including: finance, distribution, representation






I'm so glad @Hypothes_is is recording the sessions of . So much valuable material about and pedagogy to absorb. This will need a few rounds of notes.


@chuckfrey Primarily for note taking (90%) to feed both a WordPress site and an Obsidian database presently, but also for some social annotation (10%) with respect to things I see via or individuals' feeds

My Obsidian store serves variously as a zettelkasten, commonplace book, and wiki simultaneously though each of these are discretely fragmented. Of course I could do most of the work via Hypothesis really without any other tools at all, presuming that the data would always be there.

Large swaths of use is hiding within LMSs or is geared more toward social annotation in classrooms. I'm more interested in people using that content for their future selves or their creative endeavors.

You can find my publicly available material here:


@brunowinck Generally I read a work and make my own annotations/observations first before reading/interacting with others for this very reason. I was just struck that I'd run across an article with so many annotators that I happened to know, an event which doesn't happen to me often.

This particular piece makes some astute and useful observations, but does throw the baby out with the bathwater without a keener eye on the history and point of much of the endeavor. Lack of history and experience kills him here, but it's the same thing that is causing a lot of the problem he's seeing in the space as well. I've sprinkled my thoughts into those margins now. Perhaps I'll write a more coherent rejoinder to it shortly?


@MorrisPelzel @hypothes_is As a site owner how can I interact if I don't know the annotations exist? Or maybe I don't want to? (cf. and


@mrkrndvs Ultimately you could have more text than the original, so there's really no limit to the text beyond what your system will allow. I've not tried annotating .pdfs, but I suspect you could do it similarly to how I've done books via Kindle which let's me export/import data (example:,+Quotes). Having all the data on my own site (even if it's private) allows me much easier search via categories, tags, etc. as well. Typically for books I'm using fair use guidelines, though I'm often respectful and keep lots of my data viewable only to me, so copyright isn't a huge concern generally. For book length pieces, the Amazon Kindle will typically limit you to a percentage of the book to prevent copyright issues from the start. I don't think I've ever run up against their limit. Part of the process is to get enough to excerpt the thought to be able to find it later via search and reference it. I can always refer back to the original if necessary.

For more substantive annotations I try to add them slightly off to the side in a different font/size, but you'll also notice that some of the blue highlights also have "hidden" annotations if you hover over them with your mouse. Things can be a bit crowded with the additional highlights added by Hypothesis (and other people), though I can choose to disable them if I want for my personal work. Hopefully it's relatively obvious based on what's on the page which parts are the original text and which are my additions. When excerpting articles like Watters', the canonical URL on the page points to the original, so all the SEO and links ultimately redound to the original.


@audreywatters @mtechman @hypervisible @onewheeljoe Even with the script blocking @hypothes_is it is still possible to annotate Fortunately, though public annotations appear in the Chrome extension as existing, they don't physically appear on the site itself and need to be searched for manually to be found. I was able to do this with only just a few minutes of work, and could probably hack something more significant with some time/effort. should really try to do a better job of preventing abuse in these types of situations so writers needn't worry about providing abusers the ability to use a writer's own platform to harass them. Perhaps borrowing the NIPSA concept from Flickr for flagged annotations and/or accounts? (NIPSA is an acronym for "Not In Public Site Areas", and an admin feature of Flickr that allows their support staff to mark an account such that posts from it will not be shown in search results and other similar public views of posts.)


(Consider Adding Web Annotations to WordPress) – WordPress Trac

Mostly to provide some additional resources to the conversation I'll add the following:

Web Annotation Working Group's [ three recommendations and two additional notes]

Prior to the WPTavern post which motivated the conversation, there was a [ post written by Dan Whaley of] who worked extensively within the group. This post has some interesting overview, but those interested in a fully implemented annotation platform (presumably using many of the pieces of the proposed standard) should take a quick look at [], what it is and what it allows. Their front page has a pretty useful video introduction.

Keep in mind that some of the standard is geared specifically toward browsers and browser vendors, though WordPress could certainly implement some of the pieces from the CMS side.


@realkimhansen @signlfm If you hadn't been aware, this came out earlier in the week and may be of overlapping interest:
Three recommendations to enable Annotations on the Web | W3C News
Their method of breaking down the problem and their vocabulary may be particularly useful; the overlay onto audio may be another problem altogether...

I also thought this post (with code) by Aaron Parecki, while a relatively simple concept, was exceptionally cool.


Replied to a post on :

Settings UI/UX feature requests: Ability to globally auto-set post publicly/post to self · Issue · hypothesis/h

Perhaps it exists already and I'm not seeing it, but most of what I highlight and annotate, I typically prefer if it were automatically published freely and in the open. Currently it appears that highlights default to "only me" after they're highlighted. Annotations appear to default to public initially as they're being written, but when re-entering the text without manually hitting publish, they then are posted automatically to "only me".

This may be a reasonable default, but it means spending more time with the interface while I'm reading/working and thereby taking me out of the flow of my work.

Unfortunately, there is no default setting for forcing my highlights and annotations to be public, which means when I'm done reading that I have to go into the UI and manually do three button presses to make this happen for EVERY post. Click to edit, click the setting arrow, and finally click to publish. UGH!

In addition to allowing a master setting toggle for public/private at the main account level which would alleviate a large portion of my issue, I'd also recommend that rather than a drop down menu with two options that there just be a simple toggle to switch between public/private on each post so the user can accomplish in one click (or fingerpress on touchscreens) what currently takes two. Admittedly it's also controlling a "publish" function simultaneously, but I think that each post could have a public/private toggle and a separate "publish" button without cluttering up the UI too much.


julzybee73 If you're interested in apps for researchers, teachers, and students, you might also consider looking at additional apps like Diigo, Mendeley, and (for highlights and annotations). For bookmarking sites, there's a pretty good list here: I've written a bit about how I use my personal blog to do some of this workflow here:


I'm wondering if the @NYTimes used the Annotation Summit to make @Hypothes_is unusable on its site?


I've uploaded my notes, highlights, & annotations of "Maps of Time" by @davidgchristian