See also: IRC log
<wbailer> i volunteered for next week
meeting minutes: accepted.
<scribe> scribe: tobias
<trackbot> ACTION-109 Elaborate on the description and the meaning of each attribute by April 28 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-118 Put terminology discussion on the agenda for next telecon closed
<trackbot> ACTION-119 Review the Ontology document closed
<trackbot> ACTION-120 Submit our vocabulary to the Media Fragment WG for comments closed
AGENDA ITEM: Initial draft of "Ontology for Media Entity 1.0"
wonsuk: explains status of the
... status has already been sent to the list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009May/0113.html
... made a new draft based on the comments; added the mawg properties
wonsuk: link to see the diff between new and old version of the draft
joakim: is update from david singer incorporated in the draft?
wonsuk: not planned to add it to the document.
joakim: should we discuss the descriptions and include them in the second version?
florian: agrees; list with
properties should do it for the moment.
... would add note that we include the types and further information later.
... we can discuss it in the F2F.
joakim: thanks Wonsuk for his excellent work on the document!
<joakim> Hi felix, thanks for the review
<joakim> Please what is the status on action 101?
<joakim> "To clrify arrow + description in UC doc"
<trackbot> ACTION-101 Clarify arrow + descriptions for the diagram in section 3 of UC & req dcouments closed
joakim: use case and requirements document seems to have been published.
<fsasaki> above is version from Jan. 19th
joakim: how can we check if the document is published?
<scribe> ACTION: joakim to remind doug to publish requirements document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/26-mediaann-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-121 - Remind doug to publish requirements document [on Joakim Söderberg - due 2009-06-02].
<scribe> ACTION: joakim to talk to with Phillipe about the delay of the publication [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/26-mediaann-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-122 - Talk to with Phillipe about the delay of the publication [on Joakim Söderberg - due 2009-06-02].
<joakim> Veronique, please what is the status on ACTION-102?
<joakim> Update canonical processes use cases?
<veroniqueM> The idea was to gather feedback from the community and edit additions to the UC and req doc once more feedback is gathered
<veroniqueM> maybe it's a good idea to close this item :)
joakim: we decided to try to resolve open issues during the F2F
<trackbot> ACTION-102 Update canonical processes use cases closed
AGENDA ITEM [b] ii) Terminology
<joakim> Media Entity vs. Entity Endeavour
florian: we should stay with "media entity", otherwise the discussion will not end.
werner: Silvia commented on
Wonsuks mail about the terminology.
... Silvia said if we want to be compatible with the media fragments group we should stick to the URI resource definition
<pchampin> URI RFC: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2396.html
werner: we should look at the URI RFC to end up with a compatible terminology.
definition from URI RFC is quite general
... maybe we should stick to "resource" and acknowledge that there are different types of resources (information resource vs. non-information resource)
<joakim> are you proposing that we should use "Media Resource" instead of Media Entity then?
pierre-antoine: distinction resource vs. representation is in contradiction that we do not commit to media hierarchy (such as the one from FRBR)
<joakim> using "Media Resource" would make us compatible with Media fragments!
joakim: keep media entity or change it before publishing?
florian: we should keep "media entity"
werner: it would be more tricky
to change it later
... prefers to clarify before publication.
<veroniqueM> I think thatwe should go for interoperability with the media fragment group, but we need a term that is more generic than media resource if it has to encompass media resource AND representation
joakim: could someone summarize
the points pierre-antoine made?
... ...to argue for "media resource" and then decide on the mailing list if we change the name
<joakim> PA would it be possible for you to write such an email to the public list?
joakim: we should decide next
week if we change the name or not.
... wonsuk, what else are you missing from the group in order to have a final draft?
wonsuk: we are almost done; we
need to add some descriptions for two properties
... if anyone has comments to improve 4.1.1 : very welcome!
... otherwise the document is quite final.
<scribe> ACTION: joakim to ask the mailing list to provide descriptions for targetAudience/locator [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/26-mediaann-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-123 - Ask the mailing list to provide descriptions for targetAudience/locator [on Joakim Söderberg - due 2009-06-02].
wonsuk: we need a clarification of 4.1.1
<joakim> 4.1.1 Description of approach for the property definitions
wonsuk: ...the title makes sense, we could publish in this state, but some more ideas for this part are highly welcome to improve this part.
<veroniqueM> I am not on the phone...
<veroniqueM> I could have a look at the updated version of the document and send comments to the WG's list
joakim: we should keep 4.1.1; but elaborate it more
<veroniqueM> if that was the question :)
<veroniqueM> I think that we should change the title
<veroniqueM> we do not define the properties
<joakim> Vernoique, can you elaborate 4.1.1?
<florian> +1 veronique
<veroniqueM> we simply selected a number of these
@Wonsuk: could you explain your needs to Veronique regarding 4.1.1?
<veroniqueM> I can have a look at the doc and propose changes, I can send them to the list...
\me @Veronique: Wonsuk will write you an email
joakim: if we have the update on 4.1.1+ description of attributes by the end of this week, we could have a new draft by the next telecon
<veroniqueM> how about the introduction?
<veroniqueM> did anyone have comments about it?
<veroniqueM> it is quite a crucial part of the document!
<joakim> I have revised it1§
<joakim> I have revised it!
<veroniqueM> I know
<wonsuk> Tobias gave the comment for introduction.
<veroniqueM> I was wondering if you had had feedback about it
<joakim> Do you want another round?
<veroniqueM> no, no
<veroniqueM> I was just asking :)
<veroniqueM> perfect if everyone is fine with it!
joakim: conference is closed for today!
<florian> bye bye
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/ACTION-101/ACTION-102/ Found Scribe: tobias Inferring ScribeNick: tobias WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: P0 P10 aaaa florian fsasaki joakim ok pchampin pierre-antoine shepazu tobias trackbot veroniqueM wbailer werner wonsuk You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Regrets: Raphael Chris_and_JP Got date from IRC log name: 26 May 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/05/26-mediaann-minutes.html People with action items: joakim WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]