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

RE : RE : multimedia metadata formats examples satus and update

From: Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:59:12 +0200
To: "Evain, Jean-Pierre" <evain@ebu.ch>, "'tmichel@w3.org'" <tmichel@w3.org>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7D1656F54141C042A1B2556AE5237D60010F5A1BC5AC@GVAMAIL.gva.ebu.ch>
the zipped HTML test pages for TVA and IPTC are attached.

Regards,

jean-Pierre

________________________________________
De : Evain, Jean-Pierre
Date d'envoi : jeudi, 21. juillet 2011 09:36
À : Evain, Jean-Pierre; 'tmichel@w3.org'
Cc : public-media-annotation@w3.org
Objet : RE : RE : multimedia metadata formats examples satus and update

Thierry,

It seems the EBUCore HTML test table hasn't been updated.

I also went on the test suite web page and I saw that TVA and IPTC NML2 are still marked in yellow and not in green although I provide the extended XML example and corresponding RDF addressing comments from the review.

Please advise.

Regards,
Jean-pierre


________________________________________
De : Evain, Jean-Pierre
Date d'envoi : mercredi, 20. juillet 2011 16:53
À : 'tmichel@w3.org'
Cc : public-media-annotation@w3.org
Objet : RE: RE : multimedia metadata formats examples satus and update

Then to be clear you should say "RDF test" here

-----Original Message-----
From: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
Sent: mercredi, 20. juillet 2011 16:24
To: Evain, Jean-Pierre
Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: RE : multimedia metadata formats examples satus and update



Le 20/07/2011 16:01, Evain, Jean-Pierre a écrit :
> Then in this case for identifier I would say "no, not applicable".


We had agree that "N/A" is used when there is no mapping for the format.
"yes" when the property is used in an example
"not" when the property is not used in an example, but there is a mapping.
In your case there is a mapping but it is not used "tested". Therefore I
would say "no".
>
> I want ambiguity to be lift off as EBUCore of course could have tested identifier. It is already ambiguous enough to say 'tested' ->  against what: RDF only?

If you have a better suggestion than "tested" I am open to any other
suggestion here.
What we must do, is fulfill our CR exit criteria which says:

"For formats providing an example using only a subset of the properties
of the core vocabulary, the missing properties will be highlighted in
the corresponding mapping tables".

Suggestions ?

Thierry


>
> Best regards,
>
> Jean-Pierre
> ________________________________________
> De : Thierry MICHEL [tmichel@w3.org]
> Date d'envoi : mercredi, 20. juillet 2011 15:57
> À : Evain, Jean-Pierre
> Cc : public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Objet : Re: RE : RE : RE : multimedia metadata formats examples satus and update
>
> Le 20/07/2011 15:34, Evain, Jean-Pierre a écrit :
>> <<<Prise de tete>>>
>
> ???
>
>
> For clarification
> in the mapping table
>
> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html#ebu-table
>
>
> I now read for "identifier"
> N.A (removed from RDF)
>
> shouln't it be "no" ?
> as there is an exact mapping, but not used (tested) in the RDF.
>
>
>>
>> Voilà
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> De : Thierry MICHEL [tmichel@w3.org]
>> Date d'envoi : mercredi, 20. juillet 2011 15:15
>> À : Evain, Jean-Pierre
>> Cc : public-media-annotation@w3.org
>> Objet : Re: RE : RE : multimedia metadata formats examples satus and update
>>
>> Le 19/07/2011 20:37, Evain, Jean-Pierre a écrit :
>>> The updated webpage.
>>>
>>> I believe I am done.
>>
>> Sorry but in the HTML file you have sent, the "Tested" column is empty.
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> -----------------------------------------
>> **************************************************
>> 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
>> **************************************************

Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 08:01:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 21 July 2011 08:01:19 GMT