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

Re: AW: Regrets for tomorrow`s Telecon (19.05.09)

From: Florian Stegmaier <stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 10:57:49 +0200
Message-Id: <9EC461F3-2DB7-451F-A0B9-C6BD1179514A@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de>
To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Der Werner and Veronique, all,

Yes, that´s right. The fragment group calls it "media resource". From  
my point of view, the name affix "media" is not needed in our context,  
because the definition of the term leads to this fact. But it would be  
no big deal to change it to "media resource". Otherwise the term is a  
little bit more general.

Regarding the term media entity...i´m not quiet sure, but i thought  
that we will use only media entity in future (perhaps i missed  
something while scribing).

Thanks Veronique for the great improvement of the definitions! I think  
this version is much more coherent as the first one! I´m looking  
forward to the remarks of today´s telecon (already sent my regrets  
yesterday :( )


Am 19.05.2009 um 10:48 schrieb Bailer, Werner:

> Dear Véronique and Florian,
> thanks for the update of the terminology section. I'm a bit confused  
> that you use "media entity": I understood in the last telecon that  
> we would not use entity? Also, the paragraph mentions the  
> consistency in terminology with the fragments group, but afaik they  
> use "media resource".
> Best regards,
> Werner
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
>> annotation-request@w3.org] Im Auftrag von Veronique Malaise
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. Mai 2009 10:04
>> An: Florian Stegmaier
>> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
>> Betreff: Re: Regrets for tomorrow`s Telecon (19.05.09)
>> Dear all,
>> You will find in attachment the html file of the Media Ontology
>> document, please consider only the section "2.1 Terminology", that
>> Florian and I have revised. We would be interested in your feedback
>> about this section! I hope that we made the different notions a bit
>> clearer :)
>> The rest of the document is currently under revision by Wonsuk, to
>> whom we will send the section "2.1 Terminology" if the group agrees
>> with this version.
>> Best regards,
>> Véronique
Received on Tuesday, 19 May 2009 08:57:44 UTC

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