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

Re: chema.org and our Ontology

From: Tobias Bürger <tobias@tobiasbuerger.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 15:55:46 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=XG2VpCAy4KXWaXbO3UswzUoWf5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: tmichel@w3.org
Cc: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Hi Thierry,

as stated in my reply to the minutes of yesterday's telecon, I would
definitely - at least try - option 4.

Best regards,

Tobias

2011/6/8 Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>

> All,
>
> To follow up on Werner email about Last week  publication of the major
> search engines Google, Microsoft and Yahoo on the schema.org [1] web site
> an initiative for vocabularies that include sets of properties for image,
> audio and video content.
>
>
> There may be quite some overlaps in the domains of the media schemas they
> define there and our Ontology for Media Resources 1.0 [2].
>
> Yesterday during the MAWG telecon we have discuss if we should add a
> mapping of this media schemas in our Ontology spec as it seems difficult to
> ignore it, regarding the major players involved.
>
> We could:
>
> 1- Add a mapping in our Ontology (but as these are nomative, this will mean
> going back to a 3rd Last Call) and delay our spec which is now ready for CR
> publication.
>
> 2- add a mapping in a future Working Note.
>
> 3- add a mapping in a future version of Ontology for Media Resources.
> Our spec says"The following mappings are established from the Media
> Ontology's properties to various multimedia metadata formats. This list of
> formats is not closed, nor does it pretend to be exhaustive. A future
> version of this specification may include additional mappings if a need or
> use case is established for these new mappings."
>
> 4- have these guys align their schemas to our Media Ontology (let's dream a
> second ;-)
>
> Currently I have no idea how mature/stable is this media schemas (still a
> draft or more advanced ?).
>
>
> After a discussion yesterday with Philippe Le Hegaret during the
> Interactiuon meeting, I was advised that we should not at this point include
> a mapping for this schema in our Spec and follow our publication track to CR
> and beyond. We could adopt point 2 or 3 latter.
>
> This initiative will impact many WGs like RDFa, microformats, HTML, etc...
> Therefore W3C will deal with this issue.
>
> Thierry
>
>
>
> [1] http://schema.org/
> [2]
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/ontology10/CR/mediaont-1.0.html
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
___________________________________
Dr. Tobias Bürger
http://www.tobiasbuerger.com
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 13:56:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:42 UTC