RE: [MAWG] MPEG-7 Mapping review

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bailer, Werner [mailto:werner.bailer@joanneum.at]
> Sent: den 5 april 2009 12:03
> To: Joakim Söderberg; Tobias Bürger
> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Subject: AW: [MAWG] MPEG-7 Mapping review
> 
> Hi Joakim,
> 
> > That's a mistake. I can take the version from Tobias and paste in the
> property specification column from the update you sent to the mailing list
> the 6th March. > Do you think that is ok, or could it result in any
> problem?
> 
> That's ok, Tobias has already reviewed the mappings and sent me some
> comments, which could then be included into this new version.
> 
> The other thing I wonder is if property specifications have been defined
> for other formats as well which should be considered when reviewing.


In the case there are property specifications they should be reviewed. Currently only a few formats have property specifications though...

/joakim


> 
> Best regards,
> Werner
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
> > annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bailer, Werner
> > Sent: den 3 april 2009 13:32
> > To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: [MAWG] MPEG-7 Mapping review
> >
> > Dear Joakim, all,
> >
> > I've seen in Tobias' reviewed sheet that the type of relation between
> the
> > properties (Property column) is not filled for MPEG-7. I checked with
> the
> > version of the file on the linked from the review page and found that
> they
> > are missing there as well for most formats. I know that I've sent them
> for
> > MPEG-7 and SMPTE, and probably others have for their formats.
> >
> > Is there are reason why they are not included or did they just get lost?
> I
> > think they should be reviewed together with the mappings for those
> formats
> > for which they have been defined.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Werner
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
> > > Tobias Bürger
> > > Sent: Donnerstag, 02. April 2009 16:42
> > > To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> > > Subject: [MAWG] MPEG-7 Mapping review
> > >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > it seems as if my mail got lost this morning. So now I resend
> > > it without
> > > an attachment :-)
> > >
> > > I made the MPEG-7 review yesterday. Please find it here:
> > > http://tobiasbuerger.com/w3c/mapping_table_MPEG-7_review_tobias.xls
> > >
> > > (btw. there I used the mapping table which had the error with
> > > unresolved
> > > references in the sheet which affects the DIG35 part).
> > >
> > > I added two columns to the MPEG-7 sheet:
> > >
> > > (1) My assessment of the mapping: Y=green (correct), N=red (wrong),
> > > U=yellow (unclear; might be wrong)
> > > (2) Suggestion: In this column I propose other elements to map to
> > >
> > > I hope the format of the review is OK.
> > >
> > > At some points in the original mapping document some elements seem to
> > > have slipped into the wrong cells. I provide suggestions for
> > > correction
> > > in the "suggestion" column.
> > >
> > > For some elements I was not totally clear because my MPEG-7 schema did
> > > not include documentation of the elements. So I am not sure about all
> > > mappings. Perhaps my unclear points get clearer as soon as Jean-Pierre
> > > has provided his review.
> > >
> > > A valuable source for at least the Dublin Core part of the mapping can
> > > be found in [1].
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Tobias
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] Hunter, J. (2000-10). A Proposal for the Integration of
> > > Dublin Core
> > > and MPEG-7. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, 54th MPEG Meeting M6500. Available
> > > online: http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/eserv/UQ:151491/m6500.pdf
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > _________________________________________________
> > > Dipl.-Inf. Univ. Tobias Bürger
> > >
> > > STI Innsbruck
> > > University of Innsbruck, Austria
> > > http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/
> > >
> > > tobias.buerger@sti2.at
> > > __________________________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > >
>

Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 12:21:26 UTC