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

RE : change proposal in the ontology and API document (ACTION-412)

From: Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 12:53:18 +0200
To: Florian Stegmaier <stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de>, "tmichel@w3.org" <tmichel@w3.org>
CC: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7D1656F54141C042A1B2556AE5237D60010F3A5D83A5@GVAMAIL.gva.ebu.ch>
Dear all,

considering all the recent discussions, why don't we just change all datatypes for literal and provide definitions for the formats. We did it for string and dateTime already.

Something else about the RDF, although I did it, I wonder if:
- Should we remove restrictions on certain properties e.g. valid on image and not audio, etc.
- Should we state all these properties at the higher level. mediaResource and sub-classes will inherit them but if these classes are not duly identified, it would allow declaring properties without unnecessary blank nodes and the associated management of dummy identifiers

These are things I have noted while finalising my RDF of NewsML-G2 and the corresponding XML2RDF xslt for EBU purposes.

Regards,

Jean-Pierre

________________________________________
De : public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] de la part de Florian Stegmaier [stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de]
Date d'envoi : samedi, 7. mai 2011 11:17
À : tmichel@w3.org
Cc : Pierre-Antoine Champin; public-media-annotation@w3.org
Objet : Re: change proposal in the ontology and API document (ACTION-412)

hi thierry,

thank you! yes, i will reflect this on monday.

have a nice weekend!

best,
florian
_____________________________
Dipl. Inf. Florian Stegmaier
Chair of Distributed Information Systems
University of Passau
Innstr. 43
94032 Passau

Room 248 ITZ

Tel.: +49 851 509 3063
Fax: +49 851 509 3062

stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de
https://www.dimis.fim.uni-passau.de/iris/
http://twitter.com/fstegmai
_____________________________

Am 07.05.2011 um 09:55 schrieb Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>:

>
> Pierre Antoine, Florian,
>
> I have updated the Ontology spec with your edits following.
> Florian can you please update the API spec ?
>
>
>
>
>
> Change to section 4.4: Double
>
> Change title from "Double" to "Decimal"
> --> Done
>
> A Decimal value SHOULD be represented using the XML Schema decimal data type, but MAY be represented using the XML Schema double data type if decimal is not available.
>
> --> Done
>
> Other changes related to Double/Decimal
>
> All occurence of "double" or "Double" up to section 5.1 (included) can be replaced by "decimal" or "Decimal" respectively. All furhter occurences should be kept as is (they refer to the IEEE double dataype).
>
> --> Done
>
>
>
> Change to section 4.5: Date
>
> A Date value MUST be represented using one of the specific date/time data types of XML Schema, depending on the available precision: gYear gYearMonth, date, dateTime, or dateTimeStamp.
> Change to 7.2 Correspondence between the informal ontology and the RDF representation
>
> --> Done
>
> (...)
> date.date    (value of ma:date) (6)
>
> --> Done
>
> #correspondance-id6
>
> (6) According to Section 4.4, several datatypes are allowed here. However, if compliance with a specific OWL 2 Profile is required, additional constraints on the allowed datatypes may apply [OWL2 Profiles].
>
> --> Done
> Addition to Appendix B References (Non-Normative)
>
> #owl2-profiles
>
> [OWL2 Profiles]
>    OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Profiles. W3C OWL Working Group. Available for download at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/ .
>
> --> Done
>
> I have also included you new owl version "R32d"
> from 2011-04-06
>
> Finally I have added a new section with the Ontology in TTL
>
> Let me know if all these changes are OK.
>
>
>
> Le 04/05/2011 17:51, Pierre-Antoine Champin a écrit :
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as per my ACTION-412, here attached is a list of changes in the ontology
>> and API documents implementating my two proposals:
>>
>> 1/
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2011Apr/0026.html
>>
>> Basically I replaced "must use dateTime" by "must use one of gYear,
>> gYearMonth, date, dateTime, dateTimeStamp" (in both the Ontology and API
>> document) with a warning in the RDF section about OWL2 compliance.
>>
>>
>> 2/
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2011Apr/0034.html
>>
>> That one didn't receive any feedback, so I'm assuming nobody is against
>> it :) Basically, I replaced "must use double" by "should use decimal,
>> but may use double", which lets the API use 'double' (as WebIDL does not
>> have decimal) but lets RDF use the more general 'decimal' datatype for
>> the sake of OWL2 profile compliance.
>>
>>
>> Also, I attach a new version of the RDF ontology with
>> * some bugs removed
>> * those changes implemented
>> * a cleaner look
>> and a Turtle version of that ontology.
>>
>> I would suggest that both files would be *linked* from the Ontology
>> document (Turtle being marked as non-normative) rather than the ugly
>> verbatim inclusion of the RDF/XML...
>>
>>  regards
>>
>>   pa
Received on Saturday, 7 May 2011 10:53:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 7 May 2011 10:53:53 GMT