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

Re: Media annotations Working Group telephone conference 2008-11-18

From: Tobias Bürger <tobias.buerger@sti2.at>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 07:38:48 +0100
Message-ID: <492262F8.6030401@sti2.at>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
CC: Ruben Tous <rtous@ac.upc.edu>, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, public-media-annotation@w3.org

Dear Silvia, Ruben, all

just one comment to the FRBR schema: The FRBR schema has a bibliographic
background and its intention was to document more classical forms of
artistic works which might often be available in different
representations and instantions. For me this model is fairly complex and
from my personal point of few at least the item level is not very
relevant for the digital world.
The distinction between work-expression-manifestion is not easy to draw
when we aim at the description of videos.
Work would be the general idea on which a video is based on; expression
would be the expression of this idea in form of a movie manifested on a
DVD or mpg-file or what ever. The item would be the DVD I have on my
shelf at home or the mpg-file on my harddisk.

I am also with Silvia, the introduction of the complexity of this schema
depends on the scope and usage of the ontology and the requirements of
the use cases.

Nonetheless, the FRBR schema defined very useful relations between the
different entities in their schema which we could take into account
(e.g. what is an adaptation, transformation, version, etc.)



Silvia Pfeiffer schrieb:
> Hi Ruben, all,
> I found that document very interesting.
> I have a further concern that you may want to consider when looking at
> hierarchical description schemes or flat ones.
> I believe the decision depends on what viewpoint you have towards annotations.
> Both for XMP and DC, the descriptions were written in flat structures
> because they have to be able to be embedded into a data stream and
> easily extractable. Name-value fields are much easier to handle than
> hierarchical structures and are thus easier to expose as an interface
> towards something or somebody else. They essentially say "I am this
> resource and this is what I know about myself".
> The other specifications seem to be built as description schemes for
> collections of media resources. Since such descriptions necessarily
> stay out of th resources themselves, and since they tend to live in
> databases, hierarchical relationships are fairly common and a good way
> to avoid data duplication.
> So, the main question that I take out of this is: do we want to create
> an ontology that can be multiplexed into a video stream (e.g. as a
> header file in ID3 and vorbiscomment fashion, or as time-aligned text
> in the data section like TimedText or subtitles)? or do we want to
> create an ontology that can describe video stream collections?
> I am mostly interested in the earlier one, but I am not sure where the
> group is heading.
> Regards,
> Silvia.
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Ruben Tous <rtous@ac.upc.edu> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> as promised in the last telco, and with the help of Victor and Jaime, I have
>> created a page for the multi-level description review:
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MultilevelDescriptionReview
>> Best regards,
>> Ruben
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org>
>> To: <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
>> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 1:41 PM
>> Subject: Media annotations Working Group telephone conference 2008-11-18
>>> Hi all,
>>> just as a reminder, we will have a call at 18. November, Tuesday, 13:00
>>> UTC.
>>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=11&day=13&year=2008&hour=13&min=00&sec=0&p1=0
>>> Agenda will follow in a few hours. We will mainly have a slot to discuss
>>> XMP issues, if there are some new ones, new use cases, the API /
>>> ontology draft proposal and a general time schedule.
>>> Felix

Dipl.-Inf. Univ. Tobias Bürger

STI Innsbruck
University of Innsbruck, Austria

Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2008 06:37:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:31 UTC