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

Re: Elaborating on the Video use case

From: Christian Timmerer (ITEC) <christian.timmerer@itec.uni-klu.ac.at>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 08:54:40 +0200
Cc: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>, Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>, public-media-annotation@w3.org
Message-Id: <1D58D9F5-A4DA-4867-BE9F-02D34E311FB5@itec.uni-klu.ac.at>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>

Dear all,

about MS IMM: http://blogs.msdn.com/imm/
  - implements the MPEG-21 Digital Item Declaration (DID) model using  
OWL/RDF and also uses MPEG-21 Digital Item Identification (DII)
  - they have sections to describe the audio, video, image, tape, and  
custom format
  - also include dublin core predicates
  - can also include domain specific predicates like IPTC, EXIF, XMP,  
SMPTE, etc.

More information about IMM was previously available on http://www.codeplex.com/IMM 
  but it seems it has been removed there

A document about IMM has been submitted to MPEG recently but I'm not  
sure I can disclose this here. In case you're interested, I can check  
this and I'll come back to you later.

Best regards,
  -Christian

PS: for my intro please have a look at http://www-itec.uni-klu.ac.at/~timse/cv/

:--
:- Ass.-Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Christian Timmerer
:- UNIKLU: Klagenfurt University, Austria
:- TEWI: Faculty of Technical Sciences
:- ITEC: Department of Information Technology
:- MMC: Multimedia Communication
:- T    +43 / 463 / 2700 ext. 3621 (secr. 3602)
:- F    +43 / 463 / 2700 ext. 3699
:- E     christian.timmerer(at)itec.uni-klu.ac.at
:- W   http://research.timmerer.com
:-------------------------------------------------------------

Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/timse7
Subscribe to my blog: http://blog.timmerer.com

On Oct 3, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Felix Sasaki wrote:

> Raphaël Troncy さんは書きました:
>>
>>
>> Dear Joakim,
>>
>>> Maybe I have missed something, but isn't Video one of the most  
>>> important use cases?
>>
>> Video is clearly the primary focus of this WG. The goal is to  
>> provide a minimal ontology (a set of properties and concepts) for  
>> describing video content. But 'video' is a media ... not a use  
>> case ;-) So all the discussions we have in the use cases is why do  
>> you want to annotate/describe video? what should be the minimal set  
>> of properties for describing them? for doing what?
>>
>>> - VOD services. For example CableLabs VOD Metadata Content, this  
>>> is primarily used by content providers (e.g. HBO, Discovery,  
>>> Showtime) to send metadata to network operators about content  
>>> which will available in the operator’s VOD system.
>>
>> I did remember the talk from Jason Gaedtke (CableLabs) at the Video  
>> on the Web workshop [1]. Can we have access to the specification of  
>> the CableLabs VOD Metadata schema? Examples of such metadata?
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/video/positions/CableLabs.html
>>
>>> - Sharing Videos in a community. It could be sharing YouTube clips  
>>> among mobile phone users or TV-viewers who want to recommend a  
>>> program to a friend.  (It is actually supported so some extent in  
>>> TV-Anytime).
>>
>> Yes, but again, what are the interesting properties that will  
>> accurately describe the content of these videos and enhance their  
>> sharing and reuse?
>>
>>> -          EPGs (Electronic Program Guides) are supported by all  
>>> of the above plus OMA BCAST; could be worth harmonizing?
>>
>> Do you refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMA_BCAST? Is there  
>> some specification available? How is it related to TV Anytime?
>>
>>> -          Video repository management. Asset management for  
>>> personal and professional video, like the Microsoft Interactive  
>>> Media Manager, which uses ontologies to store relationships  
>>> between assets but also attributes within those assets.
>>
>> Can you provide more information on the Microsoft Interactive Media  
>> Manager, and particularly which schema/ontologies does it use?
>
> I found http://blogs.msdn.com/imm/
> It contains among others the following table:
>
>
> Prefix	URI
> dc	http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/
> dcterms	http://purl.org/dc/terms/
> did	urn:mpeg:mpeg21:2002:02-DIDMODEL-NS#
> dii	urn:mpeg:mpeg21:2002:01-DII-NS#
> imm	http://schemas.microsoft.com/imm/core/1.0#
> owl	http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
> rdf	http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
> rdfs	http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
> xsd	http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
>
> However, the URI http://schemas.microsoft.com/imm/core/1.0# does not  
> provide more information.
>
>
>>
>>> -          Semantic search and retrieval functions for Video  
>>> (MPEG-7 and MPEG-21).
>>
>> I can see how MPEG-7 is in-scope. Which parts of MPEG-21 do you  
>> think are relevant? The rights language? As said in the telecon, I  
>> would rather recommend to put in the ontology a placeholder for  
>> linking to other initiatives, being Creative Commons, PLUS,  
>> MPEG-21, ODRL, etc.
>
> +1.
>
> Felix
>
>>
>>> My point is that there are several standards involved in a Video  
>>> user case.
>>
>> Absolutely! And you mentioned just a subset. The goal of this WG is  
>> to clean up this jungle :-)
>>
>>   Raphaël
>>
>
Received on Friday, 3 October 2008 06:55:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 10 October 2008 05:33:20 GMT