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

RE: Ontology for Media Entity 1.0 (ISAN)

From: Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 10:41:21 +0200
Message-ID: <14AE8514098875488F9FEACD90C747A24B0821@gnvasmail1a.gva.ebu.ch>
To: "???" <wslee@etri.re.kr>, "Veronique Malaise" <vmalaise@few.vu.nl>
Cc: <public-media-annotation@w3.org>, "Soohong Daniel Park" <soohong.park@samsung.com>
Wonsuk, all,

 

This question about ISAN actually raises a more general issue.

 

As I understand it, the tools we are defining are to help researching
content over the Internet.  I am not sure that there will be ISAN metadata
available on the open Internet, exactly like I can't see EBU P-META
descriptions readily available for search (while EBU Core descriptions will
be found).

 

Some of these metadata schemas are very specialised if not for a use
restricted to particular domains e.g. when looking for Content with a
particular ISAN number using one of the ISANIA services, or for internal
production, or for professional B2B content  exchange in the case of EBU
P-META, (and professional news metadata for NewsML-G2).

 

I could certainly add other formats to the list but would they relevant.  I
am trying to be myself consistent with this view and this is why I only
updated the mappings for TV-Anytime and EBUCore.

 

Best regards,

 

Jean-Pierre

 

 

 

From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of ???
Sent: jeudi, 14. mai 2009 10:31
To: Veronique Malaise
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org; Soohong Daniel Park
Subject: RE: Ontology for Media Entity 1.0 (ISAN)

 

Hi. Veronique.

 

I am sorry I don’t exactly understand the meaning of “in another section”
you said.

IMO I guess if we decide to add ISAN to in-scope, we can reflect this to all
part of ontology doc that are related with ISAN.

Because we will release just first draft for ontology doc.

But even if we decide to add this, the appropriate timing is not now but the
second publication.

 

Anyway firstly we need to discuss about ISAN.

 

Best regards,

Wonsuk

 

From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Veronique
Malaise
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 5:08 PM
To: Soohong Daniel Park
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Re: Ontology for Media Entity 1.0 (ISAN)

 

 

On May 14, 2009, at 9:56 AM, Soohong Daniel Park wrote:

 

In-scope format, isn’t it ISAN in-scope ?

I don't see this format in the mapping table; we keep all the formats from
the mapping table as "in scope", if others should be taken into account in a
later stage, we should list them and mention it in the document, but in
another section. 

 

 

Best,

Véronique

 

 

-----

Soohong Daniel Park

Standard Architect, blog.naver.com/natpt

DMC Business, Samsung Electronics. KOREA

 

From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 이원석
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 7:20 PM
To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Ontology for Media Entity 1.0

 

Dear all,

 

[1] is the current version for Ontology doc.

Missing piece is the updated version of mapping table.

 

If you have any comments, please let me know.

 

[1] http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html


 

Best regards,

Wonsuk.

 


-----------------------------------------
**************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it 
are confidential and intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. 
If you have received this email in error, 
please notify the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email 
message has been swept by the mailgateway

**************************************************
Received on Thursday, 14 May 2009 08:42:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 May 2009 08:42:44 GMT