W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > December 2008

Re: Media annotations requirements draft

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 21:36:08 +0900
Message-ID: <49537E38.8040006@w3.org>
To: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
CC: public-media-annotation@w3.org

Hi Thierry,

many thanks for spotting this. I agree with you and will make the 
change. One question: which items would you put in the normative 
references section, which into non-normative section? I'm asking since 
the document will probably end up as a non-normative Working Group Note.

Just for the editors: in XMLSPEC the direct linking is the <loc> element
<loc 
href="http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/emotion/XGR-emotionml-20081120/">EmotionsML 
1.0</loc>
the indirect linking is the <bibref> element
<bibref ref="xmp"/>

Felix


Thierry Michel さんは書きました:
>
> Hi Felix,
>
> I suggest we should homogenized the external links in the document.
>
> There are cases where the liking is done directly to the resource, as 
> for example
> <a 
> ref="http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/emotion/XGR-emotionml-20081120/">EmotionsML 
> 1.0</a>,
> <a href="http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source.html">Geolocation API 
> specification</a>
>
> In other cases the linking is done indirectly to a reference index as for
> <a href="#xmp">XMP</a>
>
>
> I think we should always use indirect linking and have two sections 
> for references. One should be the Normative and the other Informative 
> References. We could also use styling to differentiate Normative vs 
> Informative.
>
> Here is an example of code for the link
>
>
> ... XMP <a href="#ref-XMP" rel="biblioentry" class="noxref"><span 
> class="normref">[XMP]</span></a> ...
>
> with following piece of code for the reference in normative ref 
> section link
>
>
>
> <h2 id="refs" > <a name="refs"> References</a></h2>
>
> <h3 id="refs-normative"><a name="refs-normative">Normative
> References</a></h3>
> <dl>
> <dt><strong><a class="normref" name="ref-XMP">[XMP]</a></strong></dt>
> <dd> <a 
> href="http://www.adobe.com/devnet/xmp/pdfs/XMPSpecificationPart2.pdf"><em>XMP 
> Specification Part 2 - Standard Schemas.</em></a>", Adobe. 2008. <br>
> This document is available at
> http://www.adobe.com/devnet/xmp/pdfs/XMPSpecificationPart2.pdf.
> </a></dd>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Thierry.
>
>
>
> Bailer, Werner wrote:
>> Dear Felix, all,
>>
>> I've had a look at the draft and I have a few (minor) comments:
>>
>> - in the 2nd par. of the introduction there are missing references to
>> the XG documents; the question is also if we should list here formats
>> that we have not considered in our mapping table (e.g. iTunes XML)
>> - 3rd par. of introduction: the formulation "access to selected
>> metadata" could be misunderstood, we should make clear that the API will
>> allow access to all elements defined by the ontology (which are selected
>> elements from different formats)
>> - sect. 4: "not" in "MUST not" should be written in uppercase
>> - requirement 13 should be requirement r13
>> - what is the policy about use of British or American English? Currently
>> it's mixed.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Werner
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org 
>>> [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Felix 
>>> Sasaki
>>> Sent: Freitag, 19. Dezember 2008 18:05
>>> To: public-media-annotation@w3.org; public-media-fragment@w3.org
>>> Subject: Media annotations requirements draft
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> an update of the media annotations use cases and requirements draft 
>>> is at
>>> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-req/mediaont-req.html
>>> we are looking forward for feedback until January 12th, and want to
>>> publish a first draft on Monday 19th.
>>>
>>> Have a nice holiday and a good new year.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Felix
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 25 December 2008 12:36:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 25 December 2008 12:36:57 GMT