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

Re: [call for comments] ma:compression vs. ma:coding vs. ma:encoding - REMIND

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 23:22:28 +1000
Message-ID: <m2y2c0e02831004280622l3a0acdeeze09fd542fcd71905@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Park <soohongp@gmail.com>
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
I vote for ma:encoding - or alternatively you could do ma:mime + ma:codecs +
ma:profile.

Cheers,
Silvia.

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Daniel Park <soohongp@gmail.com> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> This loop is very valuable discussion, but now we might select one
> definition to be ready for LC. Of course this technical debate can be kept
> in parallel...
>
> So, once again, what's your opinion. Please selece one
>
>  [1] ma:compression
> [2] ma:coding
> [3] ma:encoding
>
>
> Daniel
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Daniel Park <soohongp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> Given the comment below:
>> "ma:compression" Have you considered calling it ma:coding instead? One may
>> wish to use a coding of a resource for purposes other than compression (e.g.
>> fast random access, low memory footprint, minimal CPU usage, etc.) and in
>> some cases the coding might cause the representation to be bigger than the
>> source.
>>
>> We'd see your opinions which might be good selection for our property.
>> Please reply to me quickly. (Due is strictely today)
>>
>> [1] ma:compression
>> [2] ma:coding
>> [3] ma:encoding
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 12:28 AM, Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>wrote:
>>
>>>  Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In EBU, we use 'compression' or 'encoding' .(not coding)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards, JP
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Daniel Park [mailto:soohongp@gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* lundi, 26. avril 2010 17:07
>>> *To:* Evain, Jean-Pierre
>>> *Subject:* Re: Ontology definition
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> JP,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'd ask your opinion on the comment below:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "ma:compression" Have you considered calling it ma:coding instead? One
>>> may wish to use a coding of a resource for purposes other than compression
>>> (e.g. fast random access, low memory footprint, minimal CPU usage, etc.) and
>>> in some cases the coding might cause the representation to be bigger than
>>> the source.
>>>
>>> What do you think ? Please feedback quickly...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> 2010/4/26 Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>
>>>
>>> ;-), JP
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:
>>> public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Daniel Park
>>> *Sent:* lundi, 26. avril 2010 15:46
>>>
>>>
>>> *To:* public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>>
>>> *Subject:* Fwd: Ontology definition
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *The Forwarding Message will be attached.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: "Strassner John Charles" <johns@postech.ac.kr>
>>> To: public-media-annotation@w3.org, johns@postech.ac.kr
>>> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:47:18 +0900 (KST)
>>> Subject: Ontology definition
>>> Hi team,
>>>
>>> here is the definition of an ontology that I use when I teach. It is my
>>> definition, so you are free to blame me. :-) This is from the following
>>> reference:
>>>
>>> J. Strassner, *Knowledge Engineering Using Ontologies*, Handbook of
>>> Network and System Administration, edited by J. Bergstra and M. Burgess,
>>> Chapter 3, Section 4, pages 425-457, ISBN 9780444521989
>>>
>>> *An ontology is a formal, explicit specification of a shared,
>>> machine-readable vocabulary and meanings, in the form of various entities
>>> and relationships between them, to describe knowledge about the contents of
>>> one or more related subject domains throughout the life cycle of its
>>> existence. These entities and relationships are used to represent knowledge
>>> in the set of related subject domains. Formal refers to the fact that the
>>> ontology should be representable in a formal grammar. Explicit means that
>>> the entities and relationships used, and the constraints on their use, are
>>> precisely and unambiguously defined in a declarative language suitable for
>>> knowledge representation. Shared means that all users of an ontology will
>>> represent a concept using the same or equivalent set of entities and
>>> relationships. Subject domain refers to the content of the universe of
>>> discourse being represented by the ontology.*
>>>
>>> Ontologies can be combined or related to each other using ontological
>>> commitments as follows:
>>>
>>> *An ontology commitment represents a selection of the best mapping
>>> between the terms in an ontology and their meanings. Hence, ontologies can
>>> be combined and/or related to each other by defining a set of mappings that
>>> define precisely and unambiguously how one node in one ontology is related
>>> to another node in another ontology.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Soohong Daniel Park
>>> Samsung Electronics, DMC R&D
>>> http://sites.google.com/site/natpt00/home | Twitter@natpt
>>>   ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *************************************************** 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
>>> ************************************************** *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Soohong Daniel Park
>>> Samsung Electronics, DMC R&D
>>> http://sites.google.com/site/natpt00/home | Twitter@natpt
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Soohong Daniel Park
>> Samsung Electronics, DMC R&D
>> http://sites.google.com/site/natpt00/home | Twitter@natpt
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Soohong Daniel Park
> Samsung Electronics, DMC R&D
> http://sites.google.com/site/natpt00/home | Twitter@natpt
>
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2010 13:23:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 28 April 2010 13:23:23 GMT