W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Audio and music?

From: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:08:22 +0100
Message-ID: <82593ac00906230208g2abfdf3fi2aef0faf36a4034f@mail.gmail.com>
To: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org

>> >> I just came across the following table:
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/FeaturesTable
>> >> which (I hope, otherwise just ignore this email) is maintained by this
>> >> group.
>> >>
>> >> Does the scope of the ontology you aim at developing also encompass
>> >> audio and music? I was wondering at that when I saw ID3 mentioned in
>> >> the table.
>> >>
>> >
>> > The main focus of our group is video. We are also looking into other
>> > multimedia vocabularies, including ID3. However, I cannot tell (yet) to
>> > what
>> > extend these will be taken into account.
>> First of all, congratulations on the public draft!
> Thank you for the flowers :)
>> At this occasion, I just took a look at the latest mapping table, and
>> a few audio or music-related format are taken into account - thanks :)
>> When reading the table, I noticed that the mapping to your core
>> properties from existing formats worked really well for flat schemas
>> (e.g. DC or ID3), but the explanations of the mapping for other
>> (non-flat) schemas were missing. For example, ma:keyword is mapped to
>> adaptationOf in FRBR, and ma:title is mapped to realizationOf /
>> embodymentOf / exemplarOf. It is quite hard to guess (even for
>> FRBR-savvy people) what that could mean, and how we could proceed to
>> write a mapper from a FRBR-based vocabulary (e.g. Music Ontology) to
>> the Ontology for Media Resource.
> I completely understand your problem. To be able to solve it, some test data
> would be very helpful. Could you send us some prototypical test data you
> would use for your mapper?

Yes, of course! Here is the RDF snippet I used (stripping out the
unneeded stuff wrt. ma:title)

@prefix mo: <http://purl.org/ontology/mo/> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> .
@prefix : <#> .

    a mo:MusicalWork ;
    dc:title "Franz Schubert's Trout Quintet" .

    a mo:Performance ;
    dc:title "Trout Quintet, performed by the LSO" ;
    mo:performance_of :work ;
    mo:recorded_as [
        a mo:Signal ;
        mo:published_as :track1 ;
        dc:title "Recording of the LSO performing the Trout Quintet" ;
    ] .

    a mo:Track ;
    mo:track_number 5 ;
    owl:sameAs <http://dbtune.org/musicbrainz/resource/track/3208fbce-c20f-4362-a3d5-5405ac1904bd>
    dc:title "Trout Quintet, performed by the LSO, on 'Favorite Classics'" .

So as you can see, this RDF describes a particular track in my
collection, and holds three dc:title. It looks like the mapping table,
for FRBR (on which this snippet is based), suggests that I should use
a specific level of abstraction (the work, the performance or the
track) to generate ma:title, but the mapping just says "realizationOf,
embodimentOf  and exemplarOf".

I hope that helps!

Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2009 09:08:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:34 UTC