- From: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:27:57 +0900
- To: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <ba4134970903110927kdfc9498o51006019278295a4@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Thierry, 2009/3/11 Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org> > Felix, > > I have checked today with Ian from the W3C comm team, and I was told we can > proceed with a publication of our mapping table as is on TR page. Having > such a large table would not raise a publication issue. > > It will only need to be included into a draft with proper headings. > Therefore the document you have proposed would definitively satisfy the > publication rules. > http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html > > Two issues remain; > > The first one was raised by Raphael yesterday during the call. The Group > currently has not agreed to this table, and this is why people were asking > to review/discuss it and agree to it during the next F2F in april, before > its publication. Maybe Raphael and other should voice here. I understand that we can't publish without agreement from the Working Group. I hope that we can have a discussion here or next week on the call. I will also work with Raphael offline and try to reach a consensus. > > > > The second issue is regarding our Charter: > http://www.w3.org/2008/01/media-annotations-wg.html > > Which mentions the following deliverables > > * A W3C Working Group Note for use cases and requirements for the Media > Ontology > * A W3C Recommendation describing a simple ontology for representating a > set of concepts often associated with media objects. > * A W3C Recommendation for an application programming interface (API) to > access metadata information. > * A W3C Working Group Note for mapping the ontology to existing > standards and solutions. > > Isn't that mapping table closer the the last deliverable, W3C Working Group > Note? The charter also says " This ontology would help circumventing the current profileration of video metadata formats by providing full or partial translation and mapping between the existing formats." this reads to me like that the ontology will provide the mapping, and not the working group note. Also, the discussions during the last weeks about formalizing the mapping within the table sound like that people regard the table as a first step (or a main input) to the ontology. Felix > > > Thierry. > > > > > Felix Sasaki wrote: > >> Sorry for not being on the call. About the discussion "publishing or not": >> first, Joakim said last week >> >> "Joakim: will try to make a more publishable version of the mapping table, >> this could be a good starting point for this ontology design guideline" >> >> so I expect that we will have a version soon that can pass the publication >> rules. Second, I had fulfiled an action item to create a template for >> publishing the ontology, see the result at >> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html >> and the link where to put the mapping table at >> >> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html#mapping-table >> have you discussed this boiler template during the call? If not, why? >> >> third, and most important, 17 March I proposed >> "Felix: We should write a mail to the list that we plan to publish the >> table around the 17th of March (or as soon as possible) >> ... and whether people agree." >> and Joakim wrote the mail >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Feb/0082.html >> >> Why did the people who have concerns about the publication not reply to >> this mail? There was only a clarification question from Wonsuk. >> >> I see no new information for delaying the publication of the first draft >> of the ontology later than March 17th. The concerns from Thierry >> "Thierry: it will be difficult to publish this table in the TR space >> because of pubrules" >> will be resolved by Joakim and the boiler template, see above. The >> proposal from Raphapel >> "Raphael: and explain carefully the rationale of each mapping, the type of >> the mapping (equivalent, sub-property, related to, unspecified), the >> transitivity" >> is not new, and we had voted for publishing the table via Joakims >> 0082.html *without* these relations. >> >> So given the fact that we had no disagreement on the publication date for >> more than three weeks, I would like to move ahead and publish as soon as >> Joakim has the content of >> >> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html#mapping-table >> prepared. As with the requirements & use case document, I am very happy to >> add warnings of issue to be resolved, such as classifing mappings. >> >> If people do not agree with this proposal, I would like to hear an >> alternative publication schedule, including people taking the necessary >> actions with deadlines: >> - explain rationale of each mappings >> - produce a document that contains excerpts of the table and graphical >> representation of the mappings >> - split the table in plenty of tables with always XMP as reference >> >> The above are *potential actions*, I cannot read from the minutes what >> actions the WG really wants to take. >> >> Felix >> >> 2009/3/10 Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl <mailto: >> Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>> >> >> All, >> >> The minutes of today's telecon is available for review at: >> http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html (and in text >> format below). >> Cheers. >> >> Raphaël >> >> --------- >> [1]W3C >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/ >> >> - DRAFT - >> >> Media Annotations Working Group Teleconference >> >> 10 Mar 2009 >> >> [2]Agenda >> >> [2] >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Mar/0023.html >> >> See also: [3]IRC log >> >> [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-irc >> >> Attendees >> >> Present >> Jean_Pierre, Thierry, Pierre_Antoine, Chris, Raphael, >> Daniel_(irc), Veronique_(irc), wonsuk, (partial) >> >> Regrets >> Tobias, michele >> >> Chair >> Joakim >> >> Scribe >> Thierry, raphael >> >> Contents >> >> * [4]Topics >> 1. [5]Agenda review and approval of previous minutes telecon >> 03 March 2009 >> 2. [6]Action Items >> 3. [7]mapping of formats >> 4. [8]toy implementation >> 5. [9]AOB >> * [10]Summary of Action Items >> _________________________________________________________ >> >> >> >> <tmichel> Scribe:Thierry >> >> <tmichel> Minutes: >> [11]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/03-mediaann-minutes.html >> >> [11] http://www.w3.org/2009/03/03-mediaann-minutes.html >> >> <tmichel> hello raphael >> >> trackbot, start teleco >> >> <trackbot> Sorry, raphael, I don't understand 'trackbot, start >> teleco'. Please refer to [12]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc >> for help >> >> [12] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc >> >> trackbot, start telecon >> >> <trackbot> Date: 10 March 2009 >> >> <scribe> Agenda: >> [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009 >> Mar/0023.html >> >> [13] >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Mar/0023.html >> >> <daniel> this call starts ? >> >> <tmichel> hope Joakim will join to chair this meeting >> >> <Chris_IBBT> hopefully Joakim did not forget the different starting >> time of the phone conference >> >> <daniel> oh, call information sent from Joakim has the same timezone >> (not applying one-hour earlier). I am now traveling, hence can't >> make a phone call. >> >> <tmichel> It maybe that some people have forgotten about the time >> slot change for this call >> >> <tmichel> Should we proceed ? Do we have a quorum ? >> >> chairs, tema contact: what's happened with this call? >> >> <daniel> presumably, we will start after one-hour with Joamik >> charing. sorry for inconvenience and thanks your patient... >> >> <tmichel> Joakim sent an agenda and was schedulled to Chair. I was >> scheduled to scribe ... >> >> The agenda said: Tuesday, 10 March 13:00-14:00 UTC >> >> <Chris_IBBT> we do it in french? >> >> veronique, the telecon was messy, restart again >> >> <daniel> so sorry...this is a chairs' mistake. if ok, we will be >> able to resume this call after 50 minutes. is that ok for all of you >> ? >> >> daniel, we cannot, since Zakim is not booked! >> >> <daniel> um...ok, Thierry can you be charing this call instead of >> Joakim ? >> >> <tmichel> do we want to cancel >> >> Agenda review and approval of previous minutes telecon 03 March 2009 >> >> minutes accepted, no objections >> >> <tmichel> Propose to accept: >> [14]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/03-mediaann-minutes.html as >> >> [14] http://www.w3.org/2009/03/03-mediaann-minutes.html >> >> <tmichel> minutes of the last meeting, thanks to Veronique for >> scribing. >> >> <scribe> Scribe: raphael >> >> <pchampin> I can scribe >> >> <scribe> scribenick: raphael >> >> Scribe for next week: Thierry volunteers >> >> Action Items >> >> Felix: ACTION-43: continue >> >> All actions: 47, 54, 80, 82 continue >> >> Pierre Antoine: ACTION-83 >> >> scribe: the action is not completed >> ... I thought that the review of the standards will be done in small >> group and thus the action would have been cancelled >> >> close ACTION-83 >> >> <trackbot> ACTION-83 Review ID3 closed >> >> The remaining actions: 85, 86, 87 are still pending >> >> mapping of formats >> >> Thierry: how will we going to publish this table in our new >> document? >> >> Raphael: is there any action to actually review this table? >> >> Thierry: no, we will make small group of 2-3 people for reviewing >> part of this table >> ... should we design groups and assign formats to these groups ? >> >> Veronique: I thought we will discuss that during the face to face >> meeting >> >> Raphael: +1 for Veronique's suggestion >> >> Thierry: yes, but we should as well have some material prior to the >> f2f >> >> <daniel> this small group will be made by toy implementation >> volunteers and chairs...so toss it (reviewing the mapping table) to >> chairs this time >> >> Jean Pierre: we need experts of these formats to actually do the >> mapping, I will not dare to say something on formats I don't know >> >> Thierry: should we ask people to attach their name on specific >> format? >> >> Jean Pierre: yes >> >> <pchampin> +1 >> >> <Chris_IBBT> +1 >> >> Thierry: and then use a first come first serve principle >> >> Jean Pierre: the maker of the mapping for each specific format >> should be in >> >> <veroniqueM> +1 >> >> <scribe> ACTION: Thierry to provide the list of all formats >> considered in the mapping table with the person who did the mapping, >> leading each sub-group [recorded in >> [15]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action01] >> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-89 - Provide the list of all formats >> considered in the mapping table with the person who did the mapping, >> leading each sub-group [on Thierry Michel - due 2009-03-17]. >> >> <scribe> ACTION: ALL to join these sub-groups [recorded in >> [16]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action02] >> >> <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - ALL >> >> Raphael: why do you want to publish this table before the f2f? >> >> Veronique: in order to get comments from a wider community >> >> Thierry: it will be difficult to publish this table in the TR space >> because of pubrules >> >> Raphael: my suggestion would be to produce a document that contains >> excerpts of the table and graphical representation of the mappings >> ... but requires a lot of work, not sure you can make it in 2 weeks >> >> Veronique: graphical representation might be unreadable >> >> Raphael: yes, thus split this table depending on group of properties >> >> Veronique: we want a validation of these mappings from the communiy >> depending on the usage of the properties >> >> Raphael: then you need a lot of text explaining the rational behind >> each mappings >> >> Pierre Antoine: the current table has XMP as a pivot format >> >> scribe: split the table in plenty of tables with always XMP as >> reference >> >> Raphael: problem with that is that you remove a lot of value of the >> global view of the table >> >> Thierry: but assuming we do not publish anything by the f2f, what >> can we expect afterwards >> >> Veronique: the transitivity of the mappings is also in question, we >> need to discuss it during the f2f >> >> <Chris_IBBT> +1 Veronique >> >> +1 veronique >> >> Thierry: what I hear here, is that we should wait for after the f2f >> to go publishing a document >> >> <veroniqueM> +1 >> >> +1 >> >> Raphael: and explain carefully the rationale of each mapping, the >> type of the mapping (equivalent, sub-property, related to, >> unspecified), the transitivity >> >> Thierry: do we have a quorum for taking a resolution >> >> Raphael: i think we are not enough, can make an informal poll >> >> Chris: we should listen to the arguments of Felix that wanted to >> publish the table asap >> >> Thierry: ok, this is not a formal resolution (no quorum), but I note >> that the people present on the call want to delay the publication of >> the table >> >> Toppic: survey of mapping formats >> >> <tmichel> >> [17]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/42786/Annot-format-survey/results >> >> [17] >> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/42786/Annot-format-survey/results >> >> 12 responders on 26 people! >> >> Thierry: commenting the results received so far, see also >> [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009 >> Mar/0030.html >> >> [18] >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Mar/0030.html >> >> Raphael: I would like to raise a serious concern! I see only 12 >> responders on 26, among the non-responders, there are active >> participants ! I observe also that Dave Singer (from Apple) has >> raised concern on the poll itself and did not provide answers :-( >> >> Chris: i can ask other IBBT guys to answer as well >> >> Veronique: I have no real preferences >> >> Thierry: I'm a team contact, so I cannot answer >> >> Daniel: why did you do not answer? >> >> Others: seem to not be active participants >> >> <scribe> ACTION: Thierry to re-open the questionnaire and invite >> people to really respond even if they have no preferences, in order >> to get a quorum of responses [recorded in >> [19]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action03] >> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-90 - Re-open the questionnaire and invite >> people to really respond even if they have no preferences, in order >> to get a quorum of responses [on Thierry Michel - due 2009-03-17]. >> >> <scribe> ACTION: Thierry to chase the non-responders [recorded in >> [20]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action04] >> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-91 - Chase the non-responders [on Thierry >> Michel - due 2009-03-17]. >> >> <daniel> sorry..! I missed the due in flight... >> >> <daniel> Thierry, do we make a decision to reopen for that once >> again ? >> >> toy implementation >> >> Veronique: is there a schema of XMP available or should we construct >> it manually from the spec? >> ... should we consider the VRA mapping in the toy implementation >> given that VRA has low results in the pol >> >> Wonsuk: we can ask the schema to Adobe >> >> Raphael: I think it does *NOT* exist >> >> [21]http://support.adobe.com/devsup/devsup.nsf/docs/51668.htm >> >> [21] http://support.adobe.com/devsup/devsup.nsf/docs/51668.htm >> >> Raphael: we can of course ask confirmation from Adobe, a chair >> action? >> ... from the blog post above, it seems Adobe considers XMP as a >> framework, in which particular subsets are defined, DC, and other >> small schemas, but XMP is extensible too, thus no XMP schema exists >> ... this is how I interpret it >> >> <daniel> I was asking Adobe for some of XMP issues as well as >> Metadata WG, but no clear answer to me until now... >> >> <scribe> ACTION: Joakim to ask Larry Masinter or other Adobe's >> contact in order to know if there is an XMP schema we can have >> access too [recorded in >> [22]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action05] >> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-92 - Ask Larry Masinter or other Adobe's >> contact in order to know if there is an XMP schema we can have >> access too [on Joakim Söderberg - due 2009-03-17]. >> >> AOB >> >> Thierry: next call will be an hour earlier again!!! >> >> Chairs: need to write that in the agenda >> >> <daniel> again, sorry >> >> Summary of Action Items >> >> [NEW] ACTION: ALL to join these sub-groups [recorded in >> [23]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action02] >> [NEW] ACTION: Joakim to ask Larry Masinter or other Adobe's contact >> in order to know if there is an XMP schema we can have access too >> [recorded in >> [24]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action05] >> [NEW] ACTION: Thierry to chase the non-responders [recorded in >> [25]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action04] >> [NEW] ACTION: Thierry to provide the list of all formats considered >> in the mapping table with the person who did the mapping, leading >> each sub-group [recorded in >> [26]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action01] >> [NEW] ACTION: Thierry to re-open the questionnaire and invite people >> to really respond even if they have no preferences, in order to get >> a quorum of responses [recorded in >> [27]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/10-mediaann-minutes.html#action03] >> >> [End of minutes] >> >> >> -- Raphaël Troncy >> CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science), >> Science Park 123, 1098 XG Amsterdam, The Netherlands >> e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl <mailto:raphael.troncy@cwi.nl> & >> raphael.troncy@gmail.com <mailto:raphael.troncy@gmail.com> >> Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093 >> Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312 >> Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/ <http://www.cwi.nl/%7Etroncy/> < >> http://www.cwi.nl/%7Etroncy/> >> >> >>
Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 16:28:39 UTC