W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > December 2011

Re: updates of the Ontology for REC version.

From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:48:45 +0100
Message-ID: <4EFDEB6D.8020000@w3.org>
To: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@dfki.de>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>


Le 30/12/2011 13:58, Felix Sasaki a écrit :
> 2011/12/30 Thierry MICHEL<tmichel@w3.org>
>
>> During the current AC Rep review of the Ontology spec , a company
>> requested the following updates before going to REC.
>>
>> We should address these two items:
>>
>> 1. Updating the Exif ontology reference to the Exif 2.3 release.
>>
>> 2. Reviewing the new CIPA Exif Draft "Exif 2.3 metadata for XMP",
>> http://www.cipa.jp/english/**hyoujunka/kikaku/cipa_e_**kikaku.html<http://www.cipa.jp/english/hyoujunka/kikaku/cipa_e_kikaku.html>which assigns XMP properties to each of the Exif properties, and validate
>> that the W3C MAWG ontology is consistent with this work.
>>
>
> I did a short analysis of
> http://www.cipa.jp/english/hyoujunka/kikaku/pdf/DC-X010_E.pdf
> I don't see any inconsistencies between the "Exif 2.3 metadata for XMP"
> mappings and the MAWG mappings. The latter are more general in some cases,
> e.g. date / time related values in XMP are mapped to "ISO date format" in
> MAWG http://www.w3.org/TR/mediaont-10/#xmp-table
> but this is no inconsistency, just a generalization.


Thanks for your review.
This is good news. If I understand correctly, for the "Exif 2.3 metadata 
for XMP", this has no particular impact on our Ontology spec or our 
Ontology testsuite ? Any updates needed ? any new reference ?


For the second issue, does Updating the Exif ontology reference to the 
Exif 2.3 release has an impact on the exif mapping table or the test 
suite exif example ?

Best,

Thierry.
Received on Friday, 30 December 2011 16:49:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 30 December 2011 16:49:06 GMT