<florian_pa> sribe: florian_pa

<florian_pa> scribe: florian_pa

Wonsuk: metadata enginge on the base of the MAWG ontology could be integrated into MPEGs MXM

<Joakim> Round the Table Introduction

some discussions about projects the participants are running

<scribe> Agenda: Summary of the current LC Comments Resolutions

Danial: we got 14 comments
... we have solved a few, but 5 comments are open
... we have to finalize the documents, in order to send the revised docments to the reviewer again

Wonsuk: Veronique proposed a new draft of ontology document
... worried about that, because we stay in last call and there are lots of changes

Daniel: three issues related to ontology document: document sync, several comments have to be adressed and the mapping table

Joakim: i don?t see the effect of normative and informative in the document

Thierry: we have to include the RDF/OWL ontology into the ontology document

Jean-Pierre: we should be able to finalize it this afternoon

Daniel: regarding the ontology document, we have 3 open comments
... Doug cannot join the F2F unfortunately
... if he doesn?t join, we will leave is comments out

Werner: he joined a telco once...we could go into the minutes, to see what he proposed
... Doug was a little bit frightened about the style of the WebIDL specification and the interfaces which have to be exposed

Pierre-Antoine: Maybe we should clearly devide or better strucutre our API document
... grouping the interfaces in data structures and actual interfaces

Joakim: we decide about this later when telephone bridge is working

Thierry: let?s try to ping Doug during the coffee break

<wonsuk> Proposal from Veronique: http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.vm-04-Oct.html

<wonsuk> existing ontology which is working on after made dispositions: http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html

<wonsuk> diff version between existing one and Veronique's proposal: http://tinyurl.com/3y398st

Tobias: maybe we should choose two people to check about the changes

Volunteers for Ontology Document: Tobias & Werner

Daniel: maybe two reviewers for one comment...

Thierry: we could also provide the diff file for comparing the changelog to it

preety much confusion what version of the ontology document we should use for checking the solved comments

Florian: shall we vote?

Werner: i think no conflicts are in the documents...at least in the text

Joakim: we should go trough it right now and decide

Pierre-Antoine: the only person who could clearly say what is done is Veronique

Thierry: i think her version misses lots of new things, e.g. Raphaels changes

COFFEE BREAK

rssagent, draft minutes

<Vero> hi, I'm trying to connect but the bridge does not seem to be working

<Vero> I don't get prompted to the telecon code voicemail

<Vero> and is there someone scribing on IRC?

<scribe> scribe: florian_pa

back from the coffee break

James is on the phone to discuss the resolution send him via email

James: may remaining request is to enclude speedx and vp8 as part of the ontology

<Vero> Hi, the version of the ontology document that I had proposed for revision and approval by the grup was written before Raphael posted the new properties table. I was waiting for his new document to merge this part, but it seems that he updated it without me noticing :)

<Vero> so indeed, his part should be integrated in the ontology document

Werner: container structure is indepent from the audio/visual codec
... our set of properties is intended to be small and general
... we are not aiming at quality parameters for codecs or something like that
... only basic paramaters are in use
... a certain implementation of the mawg things must not use different codecs

James: scope and purpose of ontology includes encoding and decoding for searching and annotation

Werner: no, because the api will not provide a complete framework for annotation
... only for access
... the actual data access is not part of it

Joakim: our aim is the semantic layer, not the processing/data layer

James: why no complete framework?

Werner: beyond the scope of our group

James: what about close caption?

Jean-Pierre: in EBU we try to define the type of caption and the value

James: it would be better if the ontology would be complete (?)

Daniel: please let us move forward to the next stage
... right after that, you can formulate more use cases and so for a second version

Werner: james, we left out complete the use cases that depend on extraction, encoding or decoding
... in a first version, the api will be also read only - not wrighting metadat
... we have not included codecs only container formats
... mpeg2 would be also an important codec, but we don?t have it inside

Thierry: our first task starting the working group was to identify relevant tasks in the use case and req. document
... please refer to this document and not the mission of the group

James describes some use cases he thinks are useful.

Joakim: James, we really have to move on now, but please mail us a scenario what you want to do

Werner: let me state, that the ontology has nothing to do with a codec - it only contains metadata informations

James: maybe i should have a look at it again - thought it would be a list of codecs

Jean-Pierre: we have to make it clear in the document, that it is only a basic set of comments

Thierry: we should resend him a response and set him a deadline for response tomorrow evening

action item to werner: response james once again

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - item

action item werner: response james once again

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - item

<raphael> I would like to complete my dues changes on the ontology doc ... but I understood that the doc has forked and I don't know on which version I should work

<raphael> ... why people do not work on CVS and let CVS do the merge?

<raphael> ... can I work on the latest copy from the CVS repo?

<scribe> ACTION: thierry to response james once again and set a deadline for a response [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-327 - Response james once again and set a deadline for a response [on Thierry Michel - due 2010-11-11].

raphael - is it possible for you to come to our room?

would help to clarify things in a second i guess

<Vero> @Raphael: I wanted to integrate your work on the ontology document into my version, so we would have 2 up to date versions of the ontology document to choose from

<joakim> Veronique, can you join on tele bridge now?

<Vero> sure

yes, please join and raphael, please come to our room

<raphael> I cannot join you, I'm in the AC Room

ok

<raphael> What's the problem with CVS?

<raphael> Why CVS does NOT contain the latest version?

veronique has no working cvs

and the edits forked somehow

<raphael> It is just silly to edit document offline and do merge manually, that why we have tools for this

it?s like it is now

<raphael> then I suggest to fix Veronique's CVS so that she can use it ... and start back from the latest version in the repo

<raphael> ... that cannot be complicated, seriously!

<raphael> The version time stamped on 22/10/2010 of mediaont-1.0.xml is it a version I can work on, or someone would push a new version?

<raphael> Have you try to a cvs merge with this version and whatever versions you have sent by email?

i have just proposed this raphael

<raphael> great, thanks Florian

Thierry: i will merge the two version using cvs

<raphael> Give me a heads up when it is done as I would like to complete my action, overdued

i will tell you raphael

we will do it right after lunch

LUNCH BREAK

<Vero> @Raphael: I don't have a problem for accessing CSV

<raphael> thanks

<daniel> merged ontology doc : http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html

<raphael> Vero, the LC version is on a different folder, no risk of clash, don't get your comment

<raphael> .. the LC version is frozen in TR/ space, we are talking about editor's draft in dev.w3.org

<Vero> @Rapahel: Wonsuk was feeling that the version that I proposed was too different from the version that the LC commenters had seen for their reviews and he was thinking that it was a bad procedure to have "drastic" changes in that stage of the document, so I asked for a feedback from the group

<Vero> ... it's not about a "physical" version clash that I was worried

<Vero> ... anyway, the new version looks good and clear, to me.

<raphael> zakim does just the bridge, rrsagent the minutes

<raphael> you need rrsagent to get the minutes

<joakim_> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42786/

<joakim_> http://dev.twitter.com/doc/get/search

<scribe> ACTION: wonsuk/werner to check if comment 2389 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - wonsuk/werner

<scribe> ACTION: wonsuk to check if comment 2389 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-328 - Check if comment 2389 is in the document [on WonSuk Lee - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: werner to check if comment 2389 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-329 - Check if comment 2389 is in the document [on Werner Bailer - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: tobias to check if comment 2398 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-330 - Check if comment 2398 is in the document [on Tobias Bürger - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: florian to check if comment 2398 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-331 - Check if comment 2398 is in the document [on Florian Stegmaier - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: joakim to check if comment 2403 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-332 - Check if comment 2403 is in the document [on Joakim Söderberg - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: thierry to check if comment 2403 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action08]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-333 - Check if comment 2403 is in the document [on Thierry Michel - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: daniel to check if comment 2404 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action09]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - daniel

<scribe> ACTION: spark3 to check if comment 2403 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action10]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-334 - Check if comment 2403 is in the document [on Soohong Daniel Park - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: pchampin to check if comment 2404 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action11]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-335 - Check if comment 2404 is in the document [on Pierre-Antoine Champin - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: jean-pierre to check if comment 2405 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action12]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-336 - Check if comment 2405 is in the document [on Jean-Pierre EVAIN - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: wonsuk to check if comment 2405 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action13]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-337 - Check if comment 2405 is in the document [on WonSuk Lee - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: wbailer to check if comment 2411 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action14]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-338 - Check if comment 2411 is in the document [on Werner Bailer - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: tobias to check if comment 2411 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action15]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-339 - Check if comment 2411 is in the document [on Tobias Bürger - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: florian to check if comment 2417 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action16]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-340 - Check if comment 2417 is in the document [on Florian Stegmaier - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: joakim to check if comment 2417 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action17]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-341 - Check if comment 2417 is in the document [on Joakim Söderberg - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: thierry to check if comment 2418 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action18]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-342 - Check if comment 2418 is in the document [on Thierry Michel - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: spark3 to check if comment 2418 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action19]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-343 - Check if comment 2418 is in the document [on Soohong Daniel Park - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: veronique to check if comment 2394 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action20]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - veronique

<scribe> ACTION: vero to check if comment 2394 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action21]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - vero

vmalaise

<scribe> ACTION: vmalaise to check if comment 2394 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action22]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - vmalaise

<scribe> ACTION: chris to check if comment 2394 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action23]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-345 - Check if comment 2394 is in the document [on Chris Poppe - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: chris to check if comment 2410 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action24]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-346 - Check if comment 2410 is in the document [on Chris Poppe - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: jean-pierre to check if comment 2419 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action25]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-348 - Check if comment 2419 is in the document [on Jean-Pierre EVAIN - due 2010-11-11].

<scribe> ACTION: pchampin to check if comment 2419 is in the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html#action26]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-349 - Check if comment 2419 is in the document [on Pierre-Antoine Champin - due 2010-11-11].

<tmichel> restaurant for tonight 'Brasserie Bratteaux" 1 place Jules Ferry 04 72 74 03 98

<tmichel> to go there from here take Bus "C1" in the back of this building. It is a 5-10 minutes ride.

<chpoppe_> yep

<pchampin> scribe: pchampin

Jean-Pierre: we just had a working session on the RDF ontology with Tobias, Yannick and Pierre-Antoine

2 main discussions: about Rating and TargetAudience

both represented by resources, representing the *act* of setting a ratin/target audience

Joakim: as Chris just dialled in, we switch to the API discussion

Werner: we discussed with Doug about his comments at the coffee break

we tried to clarify that there was really just *one* interface in the API,

the other "interfaces" (in WebIDL terminology) are just to described the returned data

The other remark was that it looked like a web service API tweaked into a client API

too big type hierarchy

his idea: more generic return object (which we already have as a supertype), but without specializing it

would make it easier to query several properties at once

other point: he think it is crucial to have a browser implementation

we should talk with them

Joakim: it is a remark that I have had : "it would be cool if you returned a json object"

Werner: but we *do* return json objects; but javascript people may have difficulties to see that in the WebIDL definitions

Joakim: would it be possible to quickly make those changes?

Florian: we should present separately "real" interfaces from interfaces representing return values

Wonsuk: in the contact API, you can select the *fields* that will be returned by an API call

e.g. "I only want the telephone number"

Another thing is about error codes

in asynchronous APIs, you use an error-code function to get the error code when you want

(pchampin not sure he is getting everything here)

<chpoppe_> we have this now in the api doc also

Wonsuk: also suggest a one-all method to get all the metadata

Werner: we could simplify things by just keeping MediaAnnotation as return type

and putting specific attributes in it depending on the method called

Joakim: would also work for the server-side solution

Pchampin: think it is more a cultural problem that a technical problem

but a problem nevertheless, that we have to address

if we specified the return type in the same section as the method, it might be better understood

Chris: I also think this is mostly a misunderstanding about "interfaces"

either we explain it better in the document

<chpoppe_> so you want the generic MediaAnnotation interface have a longitude,id,role,date,value,maximum,... attributes?

* thanks chris for scribing better than I would have done :)

Werner: by explaining what interface means, we risk to emphasize even more on the term interface

which is what seems to scare people off

Chris: the document looks too complex to web developers

but they only have complains about the complexity, no solution

and we deal with a complex problem, so the document is bound to be complex

Werner: a generic return type would work for 80% of the use cases

Joakim: what about a mini-TF to get around this in the next 7-10 days

Florian: may be we should contact browser vendors?

Joakim: this would take 6 more months!

Florian: we can try to reach them while continuing our work

and take any feedback into account if we get some

Werner: we don't want to spend much time implementing the tests and then change the API

What about mixing the approaches

Having a first part with just a generic return type, then a second part for more complex scenarios

But that some people may ignore

Chris: could do that, but it is not elegant...

Pchampin: a solution would be to put all the return type "interfaces" down in the document, as an annex

Werner: then they should all have at least 'type' and 'value'

so that they are self-sufficient

Joakim: who is in favour of contacting the browser vendors

?

Thierry: don't think we should. We are in trouble if they don't like our work either way.

Florian: do we think we must make/have a browser implementation?

Chris: if Doug says that we should, I think we should.

Florian: I think we need at least feedback on how to do a browser implementation.

<raphael> just to let you know that you might be under the fire of HTML5 from now on :-) People here finally get aware of the Media Annotations API spec, and will comment, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Nov/0060.html

Chris: what exactly would be a browser implementation? Plugin?

Werner: a plugin could be an intermediate step, but ultimately, that would be a native support for the API.

<chpoppe_> excellent news raphael

Pchampin: so browser vendors have been contacted after all :)

action to joakim_ to contact browser vendors to get their feedback

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to

action joakim_ to contact browser vendors to get their feedback

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - joakim_

action joakim to contact browser vendors to get their feedback

<trackbot> Created ACTION-350 - Contact browser vendors to get their feedback [on Joakim Söderberg - due 2010-11-11].

* pchampin we ack that, Chris

<raphael> In order to help Joakim: contact Frank Olivier (microsoft), Chris Double (Mozilla), Eric Carlson (Apple), Philip (Opera) + Macjek + Paul Cotton + Sam Ruby and cc Mike Smith and Philippe Le Hegaret

<raphael> ... do not forget the cross post HTML5 + WHAtWG mailling list

<chpoppe_> please also have a look at my initial responses to robin's comments that I sent on the mailing list (subject: [todo] Response to your LC Comment -2419 on Media API spec)

action to re-organize the API document so that the return type interfaces are appear in a later section

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to

action someone to re-organize the API document so that the return type interfaces are appear in a later section

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - someone

<daniel> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2010Nov/0015.html

Chris, Werner: discuss about the response to Robin, about sychronous vs. asynchronous APIs

Joakim: now back to the RDF ontology...

Jean-Pierre: Rating and TargetAudience are now classes with a number of properties

we notices that the ontology and API are inconsistent: ratingValue is a float in the ontology, a short integer in the API

plus in the CableLab mapping table, rating is a string

Another discussion we had was about allowing both URI and String as property value.

We decided that those properties are ObjectProperty,

and use a blank node with a rdfs:label in the case only a string is available

We also require a change in the ontology:

the target audience "issuer" should be changed to "scheme"

because the same issuer can issue several schemes

(e.g. one for parental guidance, one for regions)

Joakim: would the RDF ontology be normative?

Jean-Pierre: yes

the only remaining thing to do is to review all the properties and introduce inverse properties when required

Joakim: what kind of schema is it?

Tobias and Jean-Pierre: OWL-DL

action wonsuk to change "issuer of classification" to "classification scheme" in Onto and API documents

<trackbot> Created ACTION-351 - Change "issuer of classification" to "classification scheme" in Onto and API documents [on WonSuk Lee - due 2010-11-11].

action chris to re-organize the API document so that the return type interfaces appear in a later section

<trackbot> Created ACTION-352 - Re-organize the API document so that the return type interfaces appear in a later section [on Chris Poppe - due 2010-11-11].

action chris to write an example of how the API is to be used, to appear in the API doc *before* the list of return type interfaces

<trackbot> Created ACTION-353 - Write an example of how the API is to be used, to appear in the API doc *before* the list of return type interfaces [on Chris Poppe - due 2010-11-11].

action jpevain to write a small paragraph in the Onto doc pointing to the RDF ontology

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - jpevain

action Jean-Pierre EVAIN to write a small paragraph in the Onto doc pointing to the RDF ontology

<trackbot> Created ACTION-354 - EVAIN to write a small paragraph in the Onto doc pointing to the RDF ontology [on Jean-Pierre EVAIN - due 2010-11-11].

meeting adjourned

group photo

:)

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/completed/complicted/
Succeeded: s/complicted/complicated/
Succeeded: s/What CVS does/Why CVS does/
Succeeded: s/ust/just/
Found Scribe: florian_pa
Inferring ScribeNick: florian_pa
Found Scribe: florian_pa
Inferring ScribeNick: florian_pa
Found Scribe: pchampin
Inferring ScribeNick: pchampin
Scribes: florian_pa, pchampin
ScribeNicks: florian_pa, pchampin

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Present: jean-pierre pierre-antoine eric daniel thierry joakim florian tobias werner wonsuk
Got date from IRC log name: 04 Nov 2010
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-mediaann-minutes.html
People with action items: chris daniel florian jean-pierre joakim pchampin spark3 thierry tobias vero veronique vmalaise wbailer werner wonsuk

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