N.Desquinabo tasks in the Intermed project revolve around interlocutivs kinds in debates on web [4]. This collaboration lead us to produce a first relational model based on the following principles :
- A debate is firstly defined by a subject and reflects a problem (to be resolved **or restate . . . ).**

- Each debate is associated with a body of documents **called references.**
- Documents can be put in **categories**. - Participants can create group **to defend a same opinion.** - Participants can link arguments **to a document.** - Relations **link arguments together.**
Some ideas in le discours acteur du monde **by G.Vignaux [9] illusrates our approach.**

- p55 : An argumentation is a set of reasoning to enhance a thesis. It **means argumentations are done**
to solve, enhance or defend and an argumentation is firstly defined **by a problem.**
- **definition of the dialectical discussion p30 quoted by G.Vignaux from the introduction of the Aristotle's**
Topiques by Brunschwig [2]: A two players game; It's a binary opposition, affirmation and negation, victory and defeat.

- p57 : Argumentation consists in confronting arguments and find an **issue.**

## 1.2 Arguments And Annotation

First we present our mecanism to write arguments based on annotation. An argument is a statement supporting a thesis or against a thesis. A thesis is a point-of-view regarding a debate. A thesis can be, for example, an opinion (for or against Nanotechnologies?) or an important conclusion (Nanotechnologies are dangerous) that is to be argued. Arguments are judgments that **are expressed regarding a statement. A set** of arguments for a thesis is called an argumentation.

Today forums, chats or emails are used to debate via the web. We have decided to build a different system using annotation because it can precisely localize the part of a text that a user wants to comment (or argue upon).

Definition of Annotation **: An annotation is a data attached to a document or a part of a**
document.

We had first developped ad-hoc annotations systems for our first **and second experiment platforms (Betapolitique was built with SPIP www.spip.net, and ECAP website was built with XWiki www.xwiki.com).**
For our third experiment, we have developed a solution based on Annotea protocol (www.w3.org/2001/ Annotea) and Annozilla (Annozilla is a client for the Annotea protocol **developped by Mozilla for firefox** web browser annozilla.mozdev.org). This solution is currently a prototype and is independent of website platforms.

There are other annotation systems existing (we recommend the lecture of [5] ) but choosing Annotea was done for the following reasons :
- **It allows to annotate HTML documents.**

- **Annotea is a w3c web standard protocol. This guarantees interoperability.** - **Annotations can be stored in RDF database.** - **This is an asynchronous solution based on client-server architecture.**
We have added to the current Annozilla implementation the possibility to design forms for annotation on a specified category of texts. In our experiments, an argument is **an "illocutionary-act". The statement** is selected in a document and must be rephrased to be judged, and user has to justify his act by a comment.