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

Re: Update API document

From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:43:44 +0100
Message-ID: <4B8F72C0.9030209@w3.org>
To: 이원석 <wslee@etri.re.kr>
CC: Chris.Poppe@UGent.be, Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>, "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>, public-media-annotation@w3.org
OK so you are done with all the cotation issue ?

can I freezethe document ?

Thierry.

이원석 wrote:
> It's done :)
> 
> Best regards,
> Wonsuk.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 4:51 PM
>> To: tmichel@w3.org
>> Cc: 이원석; Chris.Poppe@UGent.be; Felix Sasaki; Bailer, Werner; public-
>> media-annotation@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Update API document
>>
>>
>>
>> And probably these also need cotation:
>>
>> [http://individuals.example.com/Contributor1, "editor"],
>> [http://individuals.example.com/Contributor2, "producer"]
>> [2009-06-26T15:30:00]
>> ["San Jose", 37.33986481118008, -121.88507080078125, 0, "GPS"]
>> ["http://individuals.example.com/ChrisPoppe", 10.0, 0, 10.0, "Personal
>> Rating"]
>> [3.072, 2.304]
>> [3600]
>> etc.
>>
>> Thierry MICHEL wrote:
>>> Wonsuk,
>>>  I guess the following also needs the same update.
>>>
>>> Response (JSON format): "targetaudience" : [http://www.fosi.org/icra,"no
>>> nudity", "Age Group"]
>>>
>>> Thierry.
>>>
>>> 이원석 wrote:
>>>> Hi. Thierry.
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 4:18 PM
>>>>> To: 이원석
>>>>> Cc: Chris.Poppe@UGent.be; Felix Sasaki; Bailer, Werner; public-media-
>>>>> annotation@w3.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Update API document
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wonsuk,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your update. The API document is now ready for publication
>> on
>>>>> TR space (it will now occur next tuesday).
>>>>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/WD_V2/Overview.ht
>>>>> ml
>>>>>
>>>>> just a small remark for
>>>>> 2.3.6.2 TargetAudience
>>>>>
>>>>> in the example
>>>>> should
>>>>> [http://www.fosi.org/icra,"no nudity", "Age Group"]
>>>>>
>>>>> not be
>>>>> ["http://www.fosi.org/icra","no nudity", "Age Group"]
>>>> Right. It's done.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Wonsuk
>>>>
>>>>> Thierry.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 이원석 wrote:
>>>>>> Hi. Thierry.
>>>>>> I also updated the API
>> doc(http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/WD_V2/Overvie
>>>>> w.html) directly with my new jigedit password.
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Wonsuk.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
>>>>>>> annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 이원석
>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 11:13 AM
>>>>>>> To: tmichel@w3.org
>>>>>>> Cc: Chris.Poppe@UGent.be; Felix Sasaki; Bailer, Werner; public-
>> media-
>>>>>>> annotation@w3.org
>>>>>>> Subject: RE: Update API document
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi. Thierry.
>>>>>>> I fixed bugs. Please find the enclosed file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Wonsuk.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 12:40 AM
>>>>>>>> To: Chris.Poppe@UGent.be
>>>>>>>> Cc: 'Felix Sasaki'; 'Bailer, Werner'; 이원석; public-media-
>>>>>>>> annotation@w3.org
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Update API document
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have copied the API document to
>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/WD_V2/Overvie
>>>>>>>> w.ht
>>>>>>>> ml
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The document does not validate HTML.
>>>>>>>>
>> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Anno
>>>>>>>> tati
>>>>>>>> ons/drafts/API10/WD_V2/Overview.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also there is a broken link
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Line: 648 ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/bcp/bcp47.txt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please fix these two issues ASAP as I can not publish the document
>> as
>>>>> is.
>>>>>>>> On my side I have updated the Status of this document section and
>>>>>>>> header section to conform to the publication rules.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thierry.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Poppe wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have updated the API document according to the remarks of Werner
>>>>>>>>> (except for the list of possible values remark).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> @Felix,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I guess the request could look something like this (I have no idea
>>>>>>>>> about the proper syntax so it’s just to give you an idea):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Request:
>>>>>>>>> http://example.com/my-media-resource/getProperty?ma-name=x&?ma-
>>>>>>>> source=y&?ma-subtype=z&?ma-language=s&?ma-fragment=t
>>>>>>>>> Not sure how to denote that these are optional parameters, or what
>>>>>>>>> the JSON format is to return the list of MAObjects that correspond
>>>>>>>>> to the request. I am sure you can come up with a good solution.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kind regard,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *From:* public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of
>> *Felix
>>>>>>>> Sasaki
>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* maandag 1 maart 2010 20:35
>>>>>>>>> *To:* Bailer, Werner
>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* ???; Chris.Poppe@ugent.be; public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: Update API document
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello Werner, Chris, all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree with your comments, esp. the non-alignment between the Web
>>>>>>>>> Service Usage and the API. I am happy to change the Web Service
>>>>>>>>> usage and implement other comments in this thread, but it would be
>>>>>>>>> great to have an example for one property how the web service
>>>>>>>>> request should look like.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance & best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2010/3/1 Bailer, Werner <werner.bailer@joanneum.at
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:werner.bailer@joanneum.at>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think the API document has progressed a lot. I have the
>> following
>>>>>>>>> remarks (in addition to Chris’):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - the first editorial note in section 2 can be removed, this is
>> IMO
>>>>>>>>> now
>>>>>>>> done
>>>>>>>>> - the second editorial note (SET functionality) could be turned
>> into
>>>>>>>>> text explaining the reasons for not including set functionality
>> now.
>>>>>>>>> Even if we decide to add it, it is unlikely to be mandatory for an
>>>>>>>>> implementation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - the editorial note in the first sentence of “Web service” in 2.1
>>>>>>>>> can be removed, this is done with the Felix definitions
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - the image file for the figure in section 2.1 seems not to be at
>>>>>>>>> the right place, also I suggest to use a PNG instead of a JPEG for
>> a
>>>>>>>>> figure like this
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - section 2.1 as the text references “scenario x” it might be
>> useful
>>>>>>>>> to add “scenario x: …” to the headings user agent and web service
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - if I saw that correctly, all return types inherit (at least)
>> from
>>>>>>>>> MAObject - should get Property return MAObject[] instead of
>> object[] ?
>>>>>>>>> - 2.3.1.1 what is EASN? Was this meant to say ISAN?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - 2.3.1.1 wrong indentation of the attribute of the Identifier
>>>>>>>>> interface
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - 2.3.1.3 the example for language should not say N/A
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - 2.3.2.4 <http://2.3.2.4>: typos: “altitudee” and “altitiude”
>>>>>>>>> (seems someone doesn’t like this word ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - lists of possible value: this is quite inconsistent now, e.g. a
>>>>>>>>> list of values for ma:contributor, but not for ma:creator; for
>> some
>>>>>>>>> it seems to make sense to put them directly into the document (e.g.
>>>>>>>>> types of policy, and possibly relation), but for those where there
>>>>>>>>> can be many values (genre, creator, contributor) we should
>> reference
>>>>>>>>> a vocabulary we consider best practice
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *From:* public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org>
>>>>>>>>> [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org>] *On Behalf Of *???
>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Samstag, 27. Februar 2010 16:03
>>>>>>>>> *To:* Felix Sasaki; Chris.Poppe@ugent.be
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:Chris.Poppe@ugent.be>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* public-media-annotation@w3.org <mailto:public-media-
>>>>>>>> annotation@w3.org>
>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: Update API document
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi. Felix, Chris and all.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Most of all, thanks for Felix and Chris’s revision.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I updated the API doc with Felix’s file. In addition I commit two
>>>>>>>>> files(XML and HTML) from Felix to the CVS repository. Because I
>>>>>>>>> guess Thierry is on the trip at this moment ;)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So you can take a look at the last version of API doc via below
>> link.
>>>>>>>>> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-api-1.0/mediaont-
>> api-
>>>>>>>> 1.0.html
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Wonsuk.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *From:* public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org>
>>>>>>>>> [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org>] *On Behalf Of
>>>>>>>>> *Felix
>>>>>>>> Sasaki
>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, February 26, 2010 9:20 PM
>>>>>>>>> *To:* Chris.Poppe@ugent.be <mailto:Chris.Poppe@ugent.be>
>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* public-media-annotation@w3.org <mailto:public-media-
>>>>>>>> annotation@w3.org>
>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: Update API document
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Chris, all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2010/2/25 Chris Poppe <chris.poppe@ugent.be
>>>>>>>> <mailto:chris.poppe@ugent.be>>
>>>>>>>>> Now I really changed the subject of the mail so that people are
>> not
>>>>>>>>> confused.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Ghent University - Multimedia Lab
>>>>>>>>> Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 41
>>>>>>>>> B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> tel: +32 9 264 89 17
>>>>>>>>> fax: +32 9 264 35 94
>>>>>>>>> e-mail: Chris.Poppe@ugent.be <mailto:Chris.Poppe@ugent.be>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> URL: http://multimedialab.elis.ugent.be
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht ----------
>>>>>>>>> From: "Chris Poppe" <chris.poppe@ugent.be
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:chris.poppe@ugent.be>>
>>>>>>>>> To: "public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:public-media-annotation@w3.org>"
>>>>>>>>> <public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:public-media-annotation@w3.org>>
>>>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 08:25:40 +0100
>>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: Updated ontology doc within Seoul F2F meeting Dear
>> all,
>>>>>>>>> please find attached an updated version of the API document (both
>>>>>>>>> xml file and html file) (I am having troubles to upload this).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Felix, after you add your updates could you please upload this?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I made the updates, but unfortunately I am also currently not able
>>>>>>>>> to commit to CVS. Thierry, could you do that? See
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://fabday.fh-potsdam.de/~sasaki/mawg/ma-api-doc-20100226.zip
>>>>>>>>> <http://fabday.fh-potsdam.de/%7Esasaki/mawg/ma-api-doc-
>> 20100226.zip>
>>>>>>>>> The ZIP-File contains an HTML-version of the draft, the XML-source,
>>>>>>>>> and a diff between Chris' version and mine, to show you my edits.
>> If
>>>>>>>>> there are further comments today, I can make another editing round
>>>>>>> tonight.
>>>>>>>>> Btw., I changed some of the non-webservice examples, since the
>>>>>>>>> output seemed inconsistent, e.g. the writing conventions for
>>>>>>>>> DOMString result types are not always the same. Also a question:
>>>>>>>>> should we have one convention for properties names with multiple
>>>>>>>>> words, e.g. "named fragments"? I would propose to use small caps
>> and
>>>>> a
>>>>>>> hyphen always, e.g.
>>>>>>>>> "named-fragments". What do people think?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     Current changes:
>>>>>>>>>     added subtypes/roles
>>>>>>>>>     added information on the use of the API (two use case scenarios)
>>>>>>>>>     created new interface to hold language attribute.
>>>>>>>>>     created new interface to hold uri, sourceformat,
>>>>> fragmentidentifier
>>>>>>>>>     and mappingtype
>>>>>>>>>     Updated the document with information on how to use the
>> subtypes
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     Kind regards,
>>>>>>>>>     Chris
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     --
>>>>>>>>>     Ghent University - Multimedia Lab
>>>>>>>>>     Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 41
>>>>>>>>>     B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     tel: +32 9 264 89 17
>>>>>>>>>     fax: +32 9 264 35 94
>>>>>>>>>     e-mail: Chris.Poppe@ugent.be <mailto:Chris.Poppe@ugent.be>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     URL: http://multimedialab.elis.ugent.be
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
> 
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 08:44:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 4 March 2010 08:44:14 GMT