W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > April 2010

RE: comments on OMR 1.0 mapping to IPTC Schemas

From: Michael Steidl \(IPTC\) <mdirector@iptc.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:39:49 +0200
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
Cc: <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00a701cadd61$e74649f0$b5d2ddd0$@org>
Hi Felix, see more below ...


From: felix.sasaki@googlemail.com [mailto:felix.sasaki@googlemail.com] On
Behalf Of Felix Sasaki
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 2:00 PM
To: Michael Steidl (IPTC)
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Re: comments on OMR 1.0 mapping to IPTC Schemas


Hi Michael,

2010/4/16 Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org>

Hi Felix

The issue I raised is about "what are you mapping". To my understanding from
reading the specs it is a mapping between metadata properties  - which are
grouped by what? By their namespace? Or by an "existing format", and what is
a format - a named specification?

The IPTC as a standardisation organisation would prefer that properties are
considered as intellectual property of their makers. Thus a mapping is
established between the ma: properties and the Dublin Core properties and
not XMP which is only using Dublin Core properties but not having specified
them. Further the mapping between ma:title and dc:title should be applicable
regardless of the format which is used to annotate the Dublin Core Title

To add: I understand what you are aiming at with the API below, but this
would work in exactly the same way if the mapping is named "to Dublic Core"
and not "to XMP". So what I'm pointing at is more a naming and IP issue and
not a technical issue.

Understand. I tend to disagree that this is not a technical issue: if you do
not enlist the potential field names which may occur in a metadata file, the
API would need to check for everything before doing the mapping. So having
the information available "looking for ma:title in XMP files, only search
for dc:title" makes that easier.

Besides, again on the technical level, XMP defines value types like LangAlt
for dc:description, which are not available in Dublin Core itself. So having
a place to gather these types is very for the API.


OK, agreed, this is a feature beyond the Dublic Core specs.

Your IP concerns are very important, and I am thinking of how to implement
them while keeping such information . Would it help  if the table and column
3 would be renamed "Schemas used in XMP", and to add a statement to the
specification like this:

"XMP allows for using properties which are not from the XMP namespace, like
Dublin Core. The specification of mappings between these properties and the
Media Annotations Working Group vocabulary does not entail any intellectual
property relation between the maintainers of these properties, e.g. the
Dublin Core Metadata Initative, and XMP."

I think the Media Annotation group has to make a split regarding the API
specs into features regarding the "annotation technology" (e.g. XMP) and the

-          Exif metadata may also be expressed by the XMP annotation - won't
they benefit from the XMP features for Dublin Core?

-          Adobe has defined some metadata in their own "photoshop"
namespace (actually referring back the IPTC IIM metadata - www.iptc.org/IIM)
like keyword. This would perfectly fit the ma:keyword -  but is currently
excluded from the XMP mapping.

-          We, the IPTC, have defined a set of more refined Photo Metadata
in the IPTC Extension namespace - which also builds on XMP.

As XMP is an important annotation technology for visual content I would
support that the API takes XMP features into account and provides e.g. a
parameter to get a description in specific language. But the mapping from
ma: properties to properties of other namespaces should not be strictly
linked to the technology.

Having a look into mediaont-api: you define interfaces for accessing
properties, e.g.

interface StringObject: MAObject, Language {

                                   attribute DOMString value;


Perfect: you ("only") need a class for each annotation technology or format:
the XMP class, the NewsML-G2 class ;-) etc. Each class implements the
interface in a way which is specific to this annotation technology, then the
user only has to now this file includes metadata in a specific annotation
technology, then applying the right class would deliver what's expected.


Best regards



Best regards,







From: felix.sasaki@googlemail.com [mailto:felix.sasaki@googlemail.com] On
Behalf Of Felix Sasaki
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 12:05 PM

To: Michael Steidl (IPTC)
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Re: comments on OMR 1.0 mapping to IPTC Schemas


Hello Michael,

thank you for your very useful and detailed comments. I am not working on
this mapping, but on the XMP mapping table, so I have a comment related to
that below.

2010/4/15 Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org>



In addition to this review of the IPTC mapping I would like to add one more


* as the IPTC is very involved in XMP we would like to point out, that the
"Table 1: XMP" is misleading: the "XMP Attributes" like dc:contributor etc
are definitely not part of the XMP specifications, as the namespace prefix
indicates they are part of the Dublin Core specification. XMP is a
completely metadata property agnostic framework based on RDF/XML - and Adobe
makes only use of some properties in their implementation for Adobe
products, like Photoshop etc. But it would be fully XMP compliant to have an
XMP packet without a single Dublin Core property but Descriptions,
Identifiers etc. from other namespaces.

Sure. However, keep in mind that the ontology is supposed to be used to
provide mapping relations for an API. Below is a sample method, adapted from

maobject1 = setMAResource ("video.flv");

So you want to be able to get the title of a media resource - which is
AFAICT stored as dc:title in XMP.
Of course there might media files without dc:title, as you pointed out.
Because of that I would map ma:title to let's say:
- dc:title, exact mapping, dataype langalt (allows for language
- xmpDM:album, related mapping, album title in the XMP Dynamic Media schema
- xmp:Nickname related mapping, text datatype, XMP Basic schema
- xmp:Label, related mapping, text XMP Basic schema

Also the XMP mapping table needs a thorough revision, and I am currently at
it, with more updates later today.

Best regards,



Many thanks for this work as we see that NewsML-G2 provides one of the most
complete mappings to OMR of all referenced metadata schemas, so it may make
sense to stay in touch.


Best regards





Sent by:

Michael Steidl

Managing Director of the IPTC <mdirector@iptc.org>

International Press Telecommunications Council -  <http://www.iptc.org/>

Business office address: 

20 Garrick Street, London WC2E 9BT, United Kingdom

Registered in England, company no 101096



Received on Friday, 16 April 2010 12:40:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:37 UTC