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

AW: Updated ontology doc within Seoul F2F meeting

From: Bailer, Werner <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:54:41 +0100
To: 이원석 <wslee@etri.re.kr>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD9846F872C7874BB4E0FDF2A61EF09F7F9FDDA6A5@RZJC1EX.jr1.local>
Dear Wonsuk,

>> - in the abstract it says we define “semantics-preserving”: the introduction states correctly that this cannot always be achieved – so it should be removed from the abstract
> --> how about “syntactic and semantic level mappings” instead of “semantics-preserving mappings” ?

Agreed.

>> - section 3.2: we are currently not using any complex type definitions in the table, esp. not the person example given
> --> I would like to remove this part.

Agreed.

Best regards,
Werner
________________________________________
Von: 이원석 [wslee@etri.re.kr]
Gesendet: Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 07:05
An: Bailer, Werner
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Betreff: RE: Updated ontology doc within Seoul F2F meeting

Dear Werner.
Thanks for your good comments ☺

I added inline comments as below.

From: Bailer, Werner [mailto:werner.bailer@joanneum.at]
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 11:25 PM
To: 이원석
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: RE: Updated ontology doc within Seoul F2F meeting

Dear Wonsuk, all,

Thanks for the new draft, I think it is a major improvement.

However, I have a few comments:

- in the abstract it says we define “semantics-preserving”: the introduction states correctly that this cannot always be achieved – so it should be removed from the abstract
--> how about “syntactic and semantic level mappings” instead of “semantics-preserving mappings” ?

- section 3.1: shouldn’t we list for completeness also string, float and integer and refer to definitions we are using
--> Agreed

- section 3.2: we are currently not using any complex type definitions in the table, esp. not the person example given
--> I would like to remove this part.

- the editorial note in 4.1.2 should reference annex A
--> Agreed

- ma:location: I’m not an expert in this, but afaik there are different coordinate systems for geolocation, so we should add a string for the coordinate system to the log/lat/alt triple
--> I am not sure at this moment, but I added geoLocation:String to Data type column of ma:location row. Is it right?

- 4.2.1.1 ma:right should be ma:copyright
--> Agreed.

- Annex A: I think discovery of tracks can be dropped, this is resolved by the redefinition of ma:fragment
--> Agreed. Could you propose the draft of redefinition ? It would be great ☺

- Annex A: I think including the references we have in the Wiki for each of the issues could be useful
--> Agreed.


- Annex C: I’ve asked that before: are really all references normative? E.g. MPEG-21 that we consider not in scope
--> Agreed.

- typo: “vocbulary” in the introduction
- typo: cunjuntion -> conjunction in 3.2
--> Agreed.

Best regards,
Wonsuk

Best regards,
Werner

From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of ???
Sent: Mittwoch, 24. Februar 2010 09:36
To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Updated ontology doc within Seoul F2F meeting

below is the updated ontology doc within Seoul F2F meeting.
Please review and if you have any comment, let me know.

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


best regards,
Wonsuk.

Received on Friday, 26 February 2010 09:56:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 26 February 2010 09:56:24 GMT