View source

From Media Annotations Working Group Wiki

You do not have permission to do that, for the following reasons:

• The action you have requested is limited to users in the group user.
• You must confirm your e-mail address before editing pages. Please set and validate your e-mail address through your user preferences.

You can view and copy the source of this page:

<b>Genereal information:</b> <br /> This section accumulates possible improvements or enhancements for a revision of the "Ontology for Media Resource 1.0" document. These items came up in telephone conferences and the public mailing list of the MAWG. The collection´s starting point is April 2009 (till 12.06.2009). Some items of this collection might be allready closed - please add the appropriate state. <b>List of abbreviations:</b> <br /> n.y. - not yet<br /> d. - done<br /> c. - canceled<br /> o.i. - open issue<br /> m.d. - metadata<br /> <b>Accumulated topics:</b> <br /> <table border=1 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr height=24> <th height=15 width=30>Nr.</th> <th height=15 width=30>State</th> <th height=15 width=50>Date</th> <th height=15 width=150>Topic</th> <th height=15 width=500>Description</th> <th height=15 width=70>Proponent</th> <th height=15 width=300>Link to initial source (mailing list or meeting minutes)</th> </tr> <tr> <td>13</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>05.06.2009</td> <td>Data type description in the ontology doc</td> <td>The datatypes of the properties should be choosen in accordance to rhe standards in scope.</td> <td>W. Bailer</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Jun/0013.html</td> </tr> <tr> <td>15</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>09.06.2009</td> <td>Section 3.2</td> <td>refers to item 13</td> <td>J. Söderberg</td> <td>http://www.w3.org/2009/06/09-mediaann-minutes.html</td> </tr> <tr> <td>16</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>09.06.2009</td> <td>Missing: Syntactic and semantic mapping</td> <td>Syntactic mapping e.g., mapping between name and firstname surname, refers to 13</td> <td>F. Sasaki</td> <td>http://www.w3.org/2009/06/09-mediaann-minutes.html</td> </tr> <tr> <td>18</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>09.06.2009</td> <td>Layers of conformance</td> <td>It should be possible to create different "layers of conformance" in the ontology, representing different degrees of formality.</td> <td>W. Bailer</td> <td>http://www.w3.org/2009/06/09-mediaann-minutes.html</td> </tr> <tr> <td>19</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>09.06.2009</td> <td>Defining types for properties</td> <td>For elements that contain type/value pairs, such as contributor, etc. EBU classification schemes will be used as a starting point</td> <td>S. D. Park</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Jun/0027.html</td> </tr> </table> <b>Ongoing items:</b><br /> <table border=1 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr height=24> <th height=15 width=30>Nr.</th> <th height=15 width=30>State</th> <th height=15 width=50>Date</th> <th height=15 width=150>Topic</th> <th height=15 width=500>Description</th> <th height=15 width=70>Proponent</th> <th height=15 width=300>Link to initial source (mailing list or meeting minutes)</th> <th height=15 width=30>Volunteer</th> </tr> <tr> <td>6</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>19.05.2009</td> <td>Mapping table vs. formats in scope</td> <td>A few "in-scope" formats are not part of the mapping table. (Don´t know if this is allready sufficiently done in the beginning of section 4.2.2)</td> <td>V. Malaise</td> <td>http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-mediaann-minutes.html</td> <td>Veronique</td> </tr> <tr> <td>7</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>20.05.2009</td> <td>Improvement of tag descriptions</td> <td>There were some efforts in improving the descriptions of the MAWG Core Properties. Allready finalized?</td> <td>D. Singer & W. Lee</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009May/0099.html & http://www.w3.org/2009/05/26-mediaann-minutes.html</td> <td>Veronique and David</td> </tr> <tr> <td>8</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>20.05.2009</td> <td>Clarification of Sec. 4.1.1</td> <td>This section is supposed to be enlarged by some further information</td> <td>W. Lee</td> <td>http://www.w3.org/2009/05/26-mediaann-minutes.html</td> <td>Wonsuk</td> </tr> <tr> <td>12</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>02.06.2009</td> <td>Adding the types</td> <td>Adding types to the core properties should be part of the next draft. F2F St. Clara: Reordering of the properties and grouping should be in scope (see summary table). Editors should review their part in the mapping table (see MPEG-7)</td> <td>S. D. Park</td> <td>http://www.w3.org/2009/06/02-mediaann-minutes.html</td> <td>Daniel (coordination)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>11</td> <td>ongoing</td> <td>02.06.2009</td> <td>Issue "ontology"</td> <td>we never define ontology, and never state that we consider a light weight description of properties and their informal mappings as an ontology.</td> <td>V. Malaise</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Jun/0004.html</td> <td>Veronique</td> </tr> <tr> <td>14</td> <td>n.y.</td> <td>05.06.2009</td> <td>Loss of semantics</td> <td>Some mappings will produce a loss of semantic information (actor <-> pincipal protagonist). This issue should be adressed in the document.</td> <td>D. Singer</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Jun/0016.html</td> <td>Veronique</td> </tr> </table> <b>Closed items:</b><br /> <table border=1 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr height=24> <th height=15 width=30>Nr.</th> <th height=15 width=30>State</th> <th height=15 width=50>Closing Date</th> <th height=15 width=150>Topic</th> <th height=15 width=500>Description</th> <th height=15 width=70>Proponent</th> <th height=15 width=300>Link to initial source (mailing list or meeting minutes)</th> </tr> <tr> <td>10</td> <td>n.y.</td> <td>02.06.2009</td> <td>Renaming of section 4</td> <td>Section 4 should be renamed, we do not define the properties, we simply list the properties taken into account in the core part of the ontology.</td> <td>V. Malaise</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Jun/0004.html</td> </tr> <tr> <td>1</td> <td>n.y.</td> <td>25.06.2009 (F2F)</td> <td>Browseable version of the ontology</td> <td>A browseable (wiktionary-like) version of the proposed ontology could improve the understandability for people, who are not familiar with it.</td> <td>R. Tous</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Apr/0072.html</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2</td> <td>d.</td> <td>25.06.2009 (F2F)</td> <td>Adding porperties regarding descriptive and technical m.d.</td> <td>There are a few properties, which could possibly improve the expressivness of the proposed ontology: tag line, reference, sample type/depth, file size and temporal sampling rate.</td> <td>W. Bailer</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Apr/0085.html & http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Candidate_Additional_Elements</td> </tr> <tr> <td>3</td> <td>d.</td> <td>25.06.2009 (F2F)</td> <td>Adding porperties regarding rights management</td> <td>Rights management is a crucial aspect of any media consumption task. The group should not dig into the complexity of rights expressions, but perhaps add some simple property.</td> <td>T. Bürger</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009May/0000.html & http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Candidate_Additional_Elements</td> </tr> <tr> <td>4</td> <td>d.</td> <td>25.06.2009 (F2F)</td> <td>Adding porperties for types of fragments</td> <td>The two properties spatialMediaFragment and temporalMediaFragment may improve the expressivness of the ontology.</td> <td>F. Sasaki</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009May/0001.html & http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Candidate_Additional_Elements</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5</td> <td>c.</td> <td>25.06.2009 (F2F)</td> <td>ISAN</td> <td>Should it be in-scope or out of scope? Is it relevant?</td> <td>S. D. Park</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009May/0059.html</td> </tr> <tr> <td>9</td> <td>n.y.</td> <td>29.06.2009</td> <td>Unclear terminology</td> <td>What´s the exact meaning of "semantics-preserving"? Maybe rephrase? (Werner also suggests to drop it, Felix proposed to replace it by "semantic level mappings")</td> <td>V. Malaise</td> <td>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Jun/0004.html</td> </tr> </table> <b>Why not use DC (names space)?</b> <br /> or Why copying of the Dublin Core elements into a different namespace? MAWG Answers/motivation: 1) The group sees the ma: properties – not as replacements for the DC and other properties, but as identifiers for mappings between equivalent properties in various formats. 2) (Felix) There seems to be a misunderstanding in this thread about what "ma:" is. These are not new properties meant for usage themselves, but means to interrelated existing properties. The main outcome of the group is the mapping of "ma:" to other formats, that is the ontology. Currently this is a table, in the future the mapping might be represented differently. Another outcome will be an API to access metadata, but again not for reading or writing "ma:" properties directly, but rather the scenario is: you ask for "ma:creator", but will get "dc:creator" or whatever is in the media file, and you ask for writing a "creator", but we will not write "ma:creator" in the media file, but what is appropriate for the format. 3) Another might be that DC is simply one of 25+ schemes investigated, all of which have some common aspects. Why bless DC rather than the others? A DC response here would be that Dublin Core is intended to be a lightweight common core, created for just such purposes, ie. mixing information across domains. 4) Note also that the API we are working on, see http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-api-1.0/mediaont-api-1.0.html is even more specific than dublin core, e.g. in terms of return types. General comment: Exposing metadata is tricky, often giving a choice between creating an endless ontology or building an open-ended system that guarantees no interoperability. " I am not sure what you are looking for: - an ontology defining mappings between existing metadata (being defined by media annotations working group (MAWG)) - new metadata properties defined as an ontology (not defined by MAWG) - an API which reflects the mapping of existing properties in the ontology to access methods for metadata (provided by MAWG) - an API for low-level reading mechanisms (not provided by MAWG - e.g. for XML-based formats provided by an XML-parser)

Return to Improvements / Enhancement for a revision of the "Ontology for Media Resource 1.0" document.