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

Re: [mawg] action-249: rdfs taskforce update

From: Veronique Malaise <vmalaise@few.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 11:50:23 +0200
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Message-Id: <1D86B313-4100-4BE9-8EFD-87B2DFF818C5@few.vu.nl>
To: Tobias Bürger <tobias.buerger@salzburgresearch.at>
OK, thanks for the clarification!

Véro

On Jun 1, 2010, at 11:17 AM, Tobias Bürger wrote:

> Hi Veronique,
>
> Am 01.06.2010 12:02, schrieb Veronique Malaise:
>>
>> Hi Tobias, all,
>>
>> I had two questions about this version:
>> 1/ how do you envisage to express the value of the rating if the  
>> rating property is an object property, pointing to a skos Concept?
>>  <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="rating">
>>     <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Concept 
>> "/>
>>     <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#MediaResource"/>
>>   </owl:ObjectProperty>
> So we envisaged to express avalable rating values as SKOS: Concept(s).
> This is a rather simple approach; I agree. We could think of  
> including a more complex rating scheme as well (e.g. something  
> similar to the PICS rating scheme or the review vocabulary)
>>
>>
>> 2/ how do you envisage to represent the position as lat/long/alt if  
>> this is the only value that you have for the location? This could  
>> work with a GeoRSS concept, for example, but maybe you decided on  
>> the implementation of one of the possible options only? Just  
>> wondering :)
> We envisaged the encoding of positions via a Location concept which  
> we introduced (see hasLocation(Location)). The Location concept is  
> however not yet specified. We didn't get too far with discussion of  
> the shape of the concepts we introduced (also Person, etc. is rather  
> underspecified currently).
>
> Best,
>
> Tobias
>>
>> Véronique
>>
>>
>> On Jun 1, 2010, at 8:36 AM, Tobias Bürger wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jean-Pierre, Pierre-Antoine,
>>>
>>> thanks for your feedback
>>>
>>> Am 31.05.2010 17:19, schrieb Evain, Jean-Pierre:
>>>> Actually Publisher and Creator are subclasses of contributors but  
>>>> certainly not of Actor. Actor is also a subclass of Contributor.
>>>>
>>> I agree on this - I updated the ontology accordingly.
>>>> I mean IsA vs. a XML like name of an element like 'Title' vs  
>>>> 'hasTitle'
>>>>
>>> yes, we surely have to find an agreement on that, i.e. how we  
>>> would like to name the properties / classes. At the moment I use  
>>> hasXYZ for properties that I newly introduced (i.e. hasTrack,  
>>> hasPublisher). But I would be strongly in favor to consistent  
>>> naming in one or the other way.
>>>>
>>>>> The other issue, going one step further is about e.g. title or
>>>>> description types.  My proposal for this is as follows: e.g. title
>>>>> types like 'main' should be sub-properties of the title  
>>>>> property. In
>>>>> practice, migrating to RDF would require taking all controlled  
>>>>> terms
>>>>> from the predefined list of types and change them into  
>>>>> subproperties.
>>>>> If you update the list, then you create a new sub-property ->   
>>>>> this is
>>>>> taking benefit of the scalability of the RDF model.
>>>>>
>>>> I agree with that.
>>>>
>>> I agree with that as well.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Tobias
>>>>   pa
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jean-pierre
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message----- From:
>>>>> public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
>>>>> [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of  
>>>>> Tobias
>>>>> Bürger Sent: lundi, 31. mai 2010 11:01 To:
>>>>> public-media-annotation@w3.org Subject: [mawg] action-249: rdfs
>>>>> taskforce update
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> with respect to my action-249: I hacked the first version of our
>>>>> ma-ont proposal. You can find a visualization of it at
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Ontology_Implementation
>>>>>
>>>>>  I will add a documentation and the sources to the mawg wiki  
>>>>> latest
>>>>> tomorrow on the same page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any feedback and contributions more than welcome!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tobias
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>> **************************************************
>>>> 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
>>>> **************************************************
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> ================================================================
>>> Dr. Tobias Bürger         Knowledge and Media Technologies Group
>>> Salzburg Research                           FON +43.662.2288-415
>>> Forschungsgesellschaft                      FAX +43.662.2288-222
>>> Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/III   tobias.buerger@salzburgresearch.at
>>> A-5020 Salzburg | AUSTRIA         http://www.salzburgresearch.at
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> -- 
> ================================================================
> Dr. Tobias Bürger         Knowledge and Media Technologies Group
> Salzburg Research                           FON +43.662.2288-415
> Forschungsgesellschaft                      FAX +43.662.2288-222
> Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/III   tobias.buerger@salzburgresearch.at
> A-5020 Salzburg | AUSTRIA         http://www.salzburgresearch.at
Received on Tuesday, 1 June 2010 09:51:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 1 June 2010 09:51:54 GMT