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

Re: [new use case suggestion] Use Case - Digital imaging lifecycle

From: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:38:10 +0100
Message-ID: <49101802.1000602@cwi.nl>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
CC: Rubén Tous <rtous@ac.upc.edu>, public-media-annotation@w3.org

Dear all,

> as you said below, in some formats like EXIF there is no separation 
> between "historic" and metadata of the resource, and in others there is. 
> Again I think we need to decide: how many details do we want to take 
> into account? I think for metadata interoperability, the EXIF+others 
> approach from the metadata WG is sufficient. What do you think?

At this stage, I think it is not wise to take a final decision of what 
goes in the media ontology (and what does not). A very good approach is 
however to document all the possible alternatives (i.e. precisely 
describe for each formats/standards what they can do). It will be useful 
at the end for justifying the rationale behind the ontology modeling and 
scope.

Ruben, Victor (the UPC gang), do you have write access to the wiki? What 
about adding there the use cases you have sent to the list and 
completing the existing ones?
Best regards.

   Raphaël

-- 
Raphaël Troncy
CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science),
Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093
Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312
Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2008 09:38:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 4 November 2008 09:38:53 GMT