IRC log of mediaann on 2009-09-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:00:33 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #mediaann
12:00:33 [RRSAgent]
logging to
12:00:35 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
12:00:37 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be MAWG
12:00:37 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see IA_MAWG()8:00AM already started
12:00:38 [trackbot]
Meeting: Media Annotations Working Group Teleconference
12:00:38 [trackbot]
Date: 22 September 2009
12:00:57 [Hui]
Zakim, ??P4 is me
12:00:57 [Zakim]
+Hui; got it
12:01:00 [Zakim]
12:01:19 [Zakim]
12:01:40 [Zakim]
12:01:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
12:02:18 [tmichel]
zakim, who is here?
12:02:18 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +, tmichel, pchampin (muted), tobias, Hui, florian, Felix (muted), raphael
12:02:21 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, tmichel, Zakim, tobias, Hui, pchampin, fsasaki, florian, raphael, trackbot
12:02:33 [raphael]
Chair: Joakim
12:02:48 [pchampin]
Scribe: Pierre-Antoine Champin
12:02:54 [pchampin]
scribenick: pchampin
12:02:57 [raphael]
scribenick: pchampin
12:03:46 [joakim]
joakim has joined #mediaann
12:04:25 [joakim]
zakim, pick victim
12:04:25 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'pick victim', joakim
12:04:34 [fsasaki]
zakim, pick a victim
12:04:34 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose raphael
12:04:34 [raphael]
12:04:49 [joakim]
zakim, pick a victim
12:04:49 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose +
12:05:02 [pchampin]
Thierry will scribe next week.
12:05:07 [fsasaki]
also regrets for next week by Felix
12:05:22 [fsasaki]
s/by Felix/by Felix (at a workshop)/
12:05:30 [pchampin]
Next meeting will be on 2009-09-29
12:05:43 [veroniqueM]
veroniqueM has joined #mediaann
12:06:06 [pchampin]
Topic: API
12:06:48 [pchampin]
Florian: Chris has been updating Wonsuk's proposol with WebIDL
12:07:00 [pchampin]
... but may have had some problems with write access to the document.
12:07:02 [Zakim]
12:07:10 [Zakim]
12:08:26 [Zakim]
12:09:08 [pchampin]
... Chris had problem with defining the datatypes.
12:09:32 [pchampin]
... Should we use "easy" WebIDL types, or define complex datatypes.
12:10:31 [pchampin]
Chris: still have to decide whether return types should be structured or not.
12:10:59 [pchampin]
... e.g. how do we identify persons or organizations (getCreator).
12:12:40 [pchampin]
Joakim: make a proposal on which we can vote.
12:13:21 [pchampin]
Chris: we have not reached a consensus on a concrete solution yet.
12:14:25 [pchampin]
ACTION-155 ongoing
12:16:15 [pchampin]
Joakim: late for the draft document. Can the editors make a proposal in the coming week?
12:16:37 [pchampin]
s/in the coming week/by the end of the week/
12:17:04 [pchampin]
Chris: we can do that.
12:17:22 [pchampin]
Joakim: please update us on the particular issues you encounter.
12:18:02 [chris]
chris has joined #mediaann
12:18:20 [pchampin]
... Felix, do you have an opinion on the question of datatypes?
12:19:02 [pchampin]
Felix: I would prefer easy WebIDL types.
12:19:16 [fsasaki]
Felix: but have to re-think this again properly
12:19:58 [pchampin]
Joakim: we should take a decision soon, even if we need to backtrack later.
12:21:20 [Zakim]
- +
12:21:29 [pchampin]
Joakim: I have to go. Florian and Chris can discuss those issues with the rest of the group.
12:21:58 [pchampin]
Florian: we now have a WedIDL representation of the models and properties.
12:22:19 [pchampin]
... Regarding the 'contributor' property, how do we represent persons or organizations.
12:22:37 [pchampin]
... For the moment: a string, which can be a URI.
12:22:41 [pchampin]
... Any better idea?
12:23:10 [pchampin]
s/Florian: we now/Chris: we now/
12:24:49 [pchampin]
Pierre-Antoine: applications should be able to decide whether the string is intended to be a URI or not.
12:25:32 [pchampin]
Chris: in WebIDL, we can fix the meaning of the string (using comments)
12:26:15 [pchampin]
Pierre-Antoine: but in many underlying formats, you won't always have a URI, so you should be able to provide a literal string
12:26:55 [pchampin]
Chris: depends on using simple or structured value
12:27:13 [pchampin]
... Do we want to be able to give first-name, last-name, etc...
12:28:35 [pchampin]
Hui: strong type is better
12:29:19 [pchampin]
we can define a URI type, constraining the value to be a valid URI
12:30:42 [pchampin]
Chris: should getCreator return a URI, or a structured value with different properties ?
12:32:31 [pchampin]
Pchampin: I think that if we decide to provie a structured value, it should be reusing existing vocabularies.
12:32:37 [raphael]
But your URI will point to a structured object ?
12:32:46 [raphael]
... foaf:Person?
12:32:50 [raphael]
... ebu:Person?
12:32:50 [pchampin]
Chris: returning a URI shifts the problem to the application.
12:33:03 [raphael]
... iptc:Person ?
12:33:06 [raphael]
many choices :-)
12:33:18 [veroniqueM]
what about vocabularies that have no URI?
12:33:28 [chris]
well, it is not clear for the moment so the URI allows all of them
12:33:29 [veroniqueM]
lists of person names in thesauri
12:33:30 [raphael]
... DIG35 also defines Person :-)
12:33:31 [fsasaki]
I second veronique's question
12:33:50 [raphael]
veroniqueM, what's their type ?
12:34:04 [raphael]
we are interested in the type rather than the instance
12:34:24 [veroniqueM]
skos:COncept at best
12:34:40 [veroniqueM]
but usually instances of
12:35:45 [raphael]
and how would you do to get more information about the person?
12:36:11 [veroniqueM]
instances of skos:Concept
12:36:25 [veroniqueM]
not skos:Concept themselves
12:37:49 [chris]
12:39:00 [pchampin]
Pchampin: really to independant questions?
12:39:15 [pchampin]
... 1/ do we want to embed description or point to them (URI)?
12:39:35 [pchampin]
... 2/ do we prescrive a given vocabulary?
12:39:54 [wonsuk]
wonsuk has joined #mediaann
12:40:07 [veroniqueM]
I think that with the mapping table, we list a set of possible vocabularies
12:40:16 [veroniqueM]
but we should not limit the value to these
12:40:23 [raphael]
I'm not sure I understand what you meant veroniqueM: rdf:type skos:Concept means ... Barack Obama is a skos:Concept
12:40:43 [pchampin]
Chris: I think we should define a minimal vocabulary for persons.
12:40:43 [veroniqueM]
in that case yes
12:41:42 [Zakim]
12:42:13 [pchampin]
Raphael: let us ask Jean-Pierre his own rationale for defining new types or resusing existing ones
12:43:59 [pchampin]
PChampin: any one to write that mail to Jean-Pierre? :)
12:45:00 [Hui]
Here's a module from BONDI : ; it tries to abstract the AddressBook in various mobile phones. They created detailed structure about contact. Anything we can learn from their approach?
12:45:29 [pchampin]
Raphael: Chris could also elaborate on this. Jean-Pierre could tell us about that choice in EBU.
12:45:32 [tobias]
I can send this email
12:45:55 [tobias]
...because this is a very interesting question, actually.
12:46:09 [pchampin]
ACTION Tobias to ask Jean-Pierre about the rationale in EBU to redefine the notion of Person rather than reuse an existing one
12:46:09 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-156 - Ask Jean-Pierre about the rationale in EBU to redefine the notion of Person rather than reuse an existing one [on Tobias B├╝rger - due 2009-09-29].
12:47:30 [pchampin]
Chris: a couple of existing vocabularies would fulfill our needs.
12:47:49 [pchampin]
(xx45?, mpeg-7 probably)
12:48:31 [pchampin]
But it would not be a good idea to have out API returning a structured value from another ontology.
12:48:49 [chris]
12:49:00 [pchampin]
12:52:40 [veroniqueM]
Raphael just explained me what the discussion was about :0
12:52:52 [veroniqueM]
and I would vote for creating a ma:person
12:52:57 [veroniqueM]
linked to foaf:person
12:53:04 [veroniqueM]
to define things in out namesapce
12:53:15 [veroniqueM]
like we did for the equivalents of dc:title etc
12:53:25 [tobias]
yes I agree
12:53:38 [pchampin]
PChampin: if we use a generic structure (property-value paires), it is acceptable to populate it with properties from other ontologies
12:53:52 [veroniqueM]
s/out namesapce/our namespace
12:55:03 [pchampin]
Chris: in favour of defining a concept
12:55:03 [chris]
how will we define the "things"?
12:55:18 [pchampin]
Pchampin: me too
12:55:38 [chris]
do you mean with "things" specific person-related concepts like first_name, last_name, ...
12:55:42 [raphael]
My approach would be to start from the use cases, model what is necessary, and no more
12:55:45 [pchampin]
... but do you intend to do the same for *properties* of those "secondary" concepts?
12:55:57 [Hui]
things probably just DOMString
12:56:11 [raphael]
don't try to model everything you could know about a Person if it is useless
12:56:23 [chris]
I agree
12:57:06 [raphael]
Again, Jean Pierre has a very precised idea of what a metadata is necessary to define a Person in broadcasted TV content use case
12:57:10 [raphael]
... we could start from that
12:57:23 [pchampin]
12:57:31 [veroniqueM]
well, the idea is to model what is present in the Multimedia stanards, so another option is to strat from there, the same as we selected the core properties of the Media Ontology, no?
12:57:32 [tobias]
I agree to both of Raphael's comments.
12:57:42 [Zakim]
12:57:58 [raphael]
who wants to compare all xxx:Person ?
12:58:04 [Zakim]
12:58:05 [Zakim]
12:58:07 [Zakim]
12:58:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
12:58:10 [Zakim]
12:58:14 [veroniqueM]
12:58:21 [Zakim]
12:58:24 [chris]
I proposed more or less the same as what your typing now Veronique
12:58:31 [Zakim]
12:58:37 [Zakim]
12:58:46 [Zakim]
12:58:47 [Zakim]
IA_MAWG()8:00AM has ended
12:58:48 [Zakim]
Attendees were +, tmichel, pchampin, tobias, Hui, florian, Felix, raphael, Chris, wonsuk
12:59:02 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate pchampin
12:59:26 [raphael]
12:59:29 [tobias]
@Raphael: I have read a comparison of the definitions of person in existing standards some years ago. perhaps I find it somewhere and will send it arounf
12:59:47 [raphael]
it would be useful Toby, thanks!
13:01:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate fsasaki
13:03:06 [wonsuk]
Zakim, list attendees
13:03:06 [Zakim]
sorry, wonsuk, I don't know what conference this is
13:03:34 [wonsuk]
RRSAgent, make logs public
13:03:39 [pchampin]
13:03:44 [wonsuk]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:03:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wonsuk
13:03:44 [pchampin]
now there here
13:03:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
13:04:31 [raphael]
RRSAgent, bye
13:04:31 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items