Re: [web-annotation] Recommend StillImage instead of Image?

Hi Raphael,

Actually there is a simple dctype for audio dctype:Sound (
http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Sound). Likewise there is a text class in the
DCMI vocabulary (http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text). And usefully there is a
collection class (http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Collection) for unordered
networks of content objects.

I don't see an advantage to using the Schema vocabulary over the DCMI
vocabulary which is highly extensible and serves as the foundation for many
existing web ontologies.

Regards,

Jacob


_____________________________________________________
Jacob Jett
Research Assistant
Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship
The Graduate School of Library and Information Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA
(217) 244-2164
jjett2@illinois.edu

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:19 AM, Raphael Troncy via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org
> wrote:

> Given that this issue will be discussed during the [December 2, 2015
> telecon](
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Nov/0377.html),
>  what is the exact proposal here? We recommend to use the ```dctype```
>  classes, and in particular, either ```StillImage``` or
> ```MovingImage```? My problem with those classes is that there is
> nothing for Audio objects (your mp3 files don't have visual).
>
> There is a [Text class](http://schema.org/Text) in schema.org. What's
> wrong with the classes defined in the W3C Media Annotations ontology?
>
> --
> GitHub Notification of comment by rtroncy
> Please view or discuss this issue at
> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/18#issuecomment-160552383
>  using your GitHub account
>
>