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: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:44:11 +0100
Message-ID: <4D5156BB.7030202@w3.org>
To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
OK, done.

Le 08/02/2011 15:25, Bailer, Werner a écrit :
> 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 14:44:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 February 2011 14:44:38 GMT