RE: F2F 3 and call for comments

Hi Felix, 

Thanks for the feedback!  

 

One thing; on Friday we decided to not talk about "media objects" anymore, but "media entities". A media entity can be both a resource and a representation. See introduction to:

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top_Supported_Tags

 

It was a pity that you couldn't come to Barcelona, but maybe we will see you in Stockholm for the 4th F2F, planned to take place the 25th June?

 

/Joakim

 

 

________________________________

From: felix.sasaki@googlemail.com [mailto:felix.sasaki@googlemail.com] On Behalf Of Felix Sasaki
Sent: den 19 april 2009 21:44
To: Joakim Söderberg
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Re: F2F 3 and call for comments

 

Dear Joakim, all,

congratulations to this result, and sorry that I could not participate in the 2nd day of the f2f. This is an important step forward for the success of this Working Group!

Some comments on subsequent steps, maybe you have discussed them already, maybe we can discuss them briefly during the next call.

1) The value of this Working Group is two-folded: first, provide a common vocabulary for media annotations on the web, and second, describe relations of exisiting formats towards these annotions. We should continue to work on these existing relations, by getting feedback about them from outside the working group, via public working drafts with the whole mapping table. Of course, this table needs to be changed so that the "new" properties are in the center. This is no fun, but IMO very important.

2) This is also important since we need it for the API which uses that information for operations like "getAuthor(mediaObjectURI)" , hiding the underlying format. It then is also important for getting us through the CR phase - remember the testable assertions we discussed like "check if two implementations get the same results for the same method".


A few comments on the table:

the youtube data api conflats creator and contributor into author
http://code.google.com/intl/en/apis/youtube/2.0/reference.html#youtube_data_api_tag_author
we should get feedback from the developers whether our approach creates problems for them.

ma:language should be definded in terms of BCP 47, which is like a "latest version for language tags" (RFC 1766, 3066, 4646, soon another one to come). See http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt

There is an otherlap between ma:language and ma:location since language identifiers can contain location information as well. No need to conflate these, but the overlap should be explained.

Again - congratulations on this good progress, and I am looking forward for more!

Felix

2009/4/19 Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>

Folks,

The third F2F was successfully conducted at UPC in Barcelona. 

Thanks to the hosts and all present participants! You did a really good job and we had some very constructive and discussions.

 

As a result of this meeting we now have a set of "Media Annotations Attributes". It is a very important result since it will be the foundation of our second publication "Media Entity Ontology".

THIS IS CALL TO ALL PARTICIPANTS OF MEDIA ANNOTATIONS WG TO PLEASE STUDY THIS TABLE AND PROVIDE COMMENTS! The table can be found on our Wiki:

 

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top_Supported_Tags

 

Best regards

Joakim