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

RE: AW: ACTION ALL to review the Ontology spec before 2nd Last CAll

From: Bailer, Werner <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 15:25:33 +0100
To: "tmichel@w3.org" <tmichel@w3.org>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD9846F872C7874BB4E0FDF2A61EF09F965BC8E5AF@RZJC1EX.jr1.local>
Hi Thierry,

Thanks a lot.

> > abstract:
> > - "in local archives or museums": While archives could be understand
> in a broader sense, museum sounds very specific here. What about "local
> repositories" ?
> 
> You want to replace "local archives or museums" by "local repositories"
> ?

Yes, I think museum is really very specific here, given that the word does not appear any more in the document. Maybe you can think of a more appropriate word than repository?

Best regards,
Werner

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
> Sent: Dienstag, 08. Februar 2011 15:21
> To: Bailer, Werner
> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Subject: Re: AW: ACTION ALL to review the Ontology spec before 2nd Last
> CAll
> 
> Werner,
> 
> 
> Thank you for your review and the TTML mappings.
> See updates in comments bellow.
> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-
> 1.0.html#d0e10041
> 
> 
> Le 03/02/2011 18:16, Bailer, Werner a écrit :
> > Dear Thierry, all,
> >
> > here is my review:
> >
> > abstract:
> > - "in local archives or museums": While archives could be understand
> in a broader sense, museum sounds very specific here. What about "local
> repositories" ?
> 
> You want to replace "local archives or museums" by "local repositories"
> ?
> 
> > introduction:
> > - missing reference "Dublin Core set REF"
> DONE
> > - "all of needs of" ->  "all needs of" ?
> DONE
> > - "(see Use Cases and Requirements for Ontology and API for Media
> Object 1.0)": "Media Object" ->  "Media Resource"
> DONE
> 
> > - Multimedia container formats in scope: the example column says ???
> for all
> DONE
> >
> > terminology:
> > - missing reference "its machine-readable format is specified in the
> annex REF"
> DONE
> > - missing reference "properties listed in the following section REF"
> DONE
> >
> > across the document:
> > - most references are in italics, but some are not, e.g. RFC2119 in
> sec. 2, BBC in sec. 3, EBU vocabulary in sec. 5, SKOS in sec. 5, first
> MediaFragment ref in sec 6.2
> 
> Right. This is because some links reference were not done properlly. If
> I find the time I will harmonize else it will be done for CR.
> 
> > property definitions:
> > - section 5.1.3 still says: @@TODO: add more examples for all
> properties defined in the above table
> REMOVED
> 
> 
> 
> > - missing reference in 5.1.2: "proposed Use Cases REF"
> DONE
> > - 5.2.1: +1 for removing the last sentence
> REMOVED
> > - 5.2.1.3 "A future version of this specification..." : in the first
> line, it seems mappings is meant instead of properties (mentioned 2
> times) - otherwise I do not understand the meaning (how could a
> property be symmetric?)
> 
> DONE
> > mapping tables:
> > - Dublin core: language and publisher have no data type
> 
> DONE + format and collection ....
> 
> > - When DFXP was in final call, we did a mapping of the few metadata
> elements. I think we talked about that, but somehow lost track of it:
> should we add a small mapping table for TTML? If we want to include it,
> I can provide such a table quickly.
> DONE
> >
> > Acknowlegdments
> > - member list needs update, e.g. missing "A" in Courtney Kennedy's
> affiliation, Vassilis Tzouvaras has affiliation K-Space (project ended,
> consortium is thus no longer K-Space member), Jean-Pierre is listed as
> invited expert (although EBU is now member), different version of
> company name for Martin Höffernig and myself
> 
> 
> UPDATED
> 
> 
> > Best regards,
> > Werner
> > ________________________________________
> > Von: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [public-media-annotation-
> request@w3.org] im Auftrag von Thierry MICHEL [tmichel@w3.org]
> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 03. Februar 2011 09:55
> > An: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> > Betreff: ACTION ALL to review the Ontology spec before 2nd  Last CAll
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Please review carefully the Ontology draft
> > http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html
> >
> >
> > This will be the *last chance* for edits before going to 2nd  Last
> Call.
> >
> > During the next MAWG telecon, the group will take the decision to
> move
> > to 2nd  Last Call.
> >
> > Please report to the mailing list your feedback.
> >
> > Thierry.
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 14:26:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 February 2011 14:26:03 GMT