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

Re: Table summarizing the state of the discusison about the ontology features

From: Ruben Tous \(UPC\) <rtous@ac.upc.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:47:52 +0100
Message-ID: <00e801c94a3c$aa661600$2f225393@UPCNET1757BE22>
To: <public-media-annotation@w3.org>

Dear Perre-Antoine,

> I think, however, that your PROs and CONs in the "structured" vs. "not 
> structured" are
> biased by the kind of structure you envision...
> Namely, you mention XML. On the other hand, I already advocated the use of 
> RDF
> (or more precisely: URIs used in external RDF descriptions).

You're right, in fact I also advocate the use of RDF (I mean the RDF model, 
not necessarly the RDF/XML serialization). When I talked about "structured" 
I wanted to refer to both XML and RDF models.

> I put some ideas on the subject in the wiki:
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/What_kind_of_structure

I agree with most part of you comments. I've added them to the table.

Thanks and best regards,

Ruben

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pierre-Antoine Champin" <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
To: "Ruben Tous (UPC)" <rtous@ac.upc.edu>
Cc: <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: Table summarizing the state of the discusison about the 
ontology features

> Dear all,
>
> in order to help you in the process of selecting the proper features for
> the ontology, I've created a new entry in the wiki. It contains a table
> which reflects the state of the different discussion topics. Feel free
> to change its contents according to your point-of-view.
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/FeaturesTable
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ruben
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 19 November 2008 11:48:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 19 November 2008 11:48:38 GMT