- From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:11:50 +0200
- To: "Höffernig, Martin" <Martin.Hoeffernig@joanneum.at>
- CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Martin,
Note that I have changed a typo in your JSON files for DC and YT.
in both files, I have chaged:
"typeLabel": "creation date"
to
"typeLabel": "creation date",
And thanks again for your valuable input.
Best,
thierry
Le 20/06/2012 12:02, Thierry MICHEL a écrit :
> Martin,
>
>
> Thanks for the files,
>
> see my publications as indicated in line
>
> best,
>
> thierry
>
> Le 19/06/2012 14:36, Höffernig, Martin a écrit :
>> Dear Thierry, all
>>
>> Please find enclosed the updated JSON and RDF files for DC and YT.
>>
>>
>> DC (changes have been made in JSON as well as RDF):
>> MADate:
>> added "typeLabel": "creation date" in JSON.
>
>
> JSON file published at
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/JSON/normative_json_ma_dc.json
>
>
> and I also updated the JSON atomic files
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/da-date_ma_dc.json
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/Db-date_ma_dc.json
>
>
>>
>> Keyword:
>> added language information (xml:lang="en") in RDF.
>>
>> Copyright:
>> changed RDF property for copyright description from ma:isCopyrightedBy
>> to ma:copyright.
>
>
> RDF file published at
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/DC_example1.rdf
>
>
>>
>> YT (changes made in JSON only):
>> MADate:
>> added "typeLabel": "creation date" in JSON.
>>
>> Keyword:
>> fixed keyword results in JSON according to RDF data.
>>
>> Rating:
>> added ratingSystemLabel attribute for Rating in JSON.
>
>
>
> JSON file published at
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/JSON/normative_json_ma_yt_oi.json
>
>
>
> and I also updated the JSON atomic files
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-date_ma_YT.json
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-date_ma_YT.json
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/yb-date_ma_YT.json
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-keyword_ma_YT.json
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/yb-keyword_ma_YT.json
>
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-rating_ma_YT.json
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/yb-rating_ma_YT.json
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Höffernig, Martin [mailto:Martin.Hoeffernig@joanneum.at]
>>> Gesendet: Montag, 18. Juni 2012 15:58
>>> An: tmichel@w3.org; public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>> Betreff: AW: AW: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues /
>>> additional issues
>>>
>>> Dear Thierry, all,
>>>
>>> as announced in my last email, here are my comments regarding the JSON
>>> youtube result set:
>>>
>>> MADate:
>>> JSON:
>>> { "MADate" : {
>>> "propertyName" : "date",
>>> "value" : "2010-01-26T10:00:00Z",
>>> "sourceFormat" : "yt",
>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>> "date" : "2010-01-26T10:00:00Z",
>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>> }
>>>
>>> RDF:
>>> <ma:creationDate
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">
>>> 2010-01-26T10:00:00Z
>>> </ma:creationDate>
>>>
>>> Optional typeLabel attribute "creation date" missing JSON, although
>>> related information available in RDF.
>>>
>>> Location:
>>> JSON:
>>> { "Location" : {
>>> "propertyName" : "location",
>>> "value" : "35.669998 139.770004",
>>> "sourceFormat" : "yt",
>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>> "longitude" : 35.669998,
>>> "latitude" : 139.770004,
>>> "altitude" : 0,
>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>> }
>>>
>>> RDF:
>>> <ma:Location>
>>> <ma:locationLongitude
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal">
>>> 35.669998
>>> </ma:locationLongitude>
>>> <ma:locationLatitude
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal">
>>> 139.770004
>>> </ma:locationLatitude>
>>> </ma:Location>
>>>
>>> No altitude data available in RDF, however altitude in JSON is set to
>>> zero.
>>>
>>> Keyword:
>>> JSON:
>>>
>>> { "Keyword" : {
>>> "propertyName" : "keyword",
>>> "value" : "SM ENTERTAINMENT Oh!",
>>> "sourceFormat" : "yt",
>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>> "keywordLabel" : "SM ENTERTAINMENT Oh!",
>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>> }
>>> },
>>>
>>> RDF:
>>> <ma:hasKeyword rdf:parseType="Resource">
>>> <rdfs:label>
>>> SM ENTERTAINMENT
>>> </rdfs:label>
>>> </ma:hasKeyword>
>>>
>>> <ma:hasKeyword rdf:parseType="Resource">
>>> <rdfs:label>
>>> Oh!
>>> </rdfs:label>
>>> </ma:hasKeyword>
>>>
>>> JSON Keyword "SM ENTERTAINMENT Oh!" is concation of 2 different
>>> keywords in RDF.
>>> Seems to be a minor issue regarding the implementation report, since
>>> the JSON result sets for 3 remaining keywords have been returned
>>> correctly.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rating:
>>> JSON:
>>> { "Rating" : {
>>> "propertyName" : "rating",
>>> "value" : "4.6510544",
>>> "sourceFormat" : "yt",
>>> "ratingValue" : 4.6510544,
>>> "minimum" : 1,
>>> "maximum" : 5,
>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>> }
>>> },
>>>
>>> <ma:hasRatingSystem rdf:parseType="Resource">
>>> <rdfs:label>
>>> higherBetter
>>> </rdfs:label>
>>> </ma:hasRatingSystem>
>>>
>>> Optional attribute ratingSystemLabel is not present in JSON result set,
>>> required data would be available in RDF.
>>>
>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>> Von: Höffernig, Martin [mailto:Martin.Hoeffernig@joanneum.at]
>>>> Gesendet: Freitag, 15. Juni 2012 13:36
>>>> An: tmichel@w3.org; public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>>> Betreff: AW: AW: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues
>>> /
>>>> additional issues
>>>>
>>>> Dear Thierry, all,
>>>>
>>>> here are my comments regarding the DC JSON result document:
>>>>
>>>> MADate:
>>>> JSON:
>>>> { "MADate" : {
>>>> "propertyName" : "date",
>>>> "value" : "2007-01-06T00:00:00.00",
>>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc",
>>>> "mappingType" : "related",
>>>> "date" : "2007-01-06T00:00:00.00",
>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> RDF:
>>>> <ma:creationDate
>>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">
>>>> 2007-01-06T00:00:00.00
>>>> </ma:creationDate>
>>>>
>>>> Since this MADate result set refers to a creation date
>>>> (ma:creationDate), typeLabel can be used to carry this information in
>>>> addition to the current result set:
>>>> "typeLabel": "creation date"
>>>>
>>>> Location:
>>>> JSON:
>>>> { "Location" : {
>>>> "propertyName" : "location",
>>>> "value" : "Hennepin Technical College",
>>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc",
>>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>>> "locationLabel" : "Hennepin Technical College",
>>>> "longitude" : 0,
>>>> "latitude" : 0,
>>>> "altitude" : 0,
>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> RDF:
>>>> <ma:createdIn>
>>>> <ma:Location>
>>>> <ma:locationName>
>>>> Hennepin Technical College
>>>> </ma:locationName>
>>>> </ma:Location>
>>>> </ma:createdIn>
>>>>
>>>> Since there is no information about longitude, latitude, and altitude
>>>> in RDF available, I suggest to remove these attributes in the
>>>> corresponding JSON result set as well.
>>>>
>>>> Keyword:
>>>> JSON:
>>>> { "Keyword" : {
>>>> "propertyName" : "keyword",
>>>> "value" : "Dublin Core Meta Tags",
>>>> "language" : "en",
>>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc",
>>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>>> "keywordLabel" : "Dublin Core Meta Tags",
>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>> }
>>>> RDF:
>>>> <ma:hasKeyword rdf:parseType="Resource">
>>>> <rdfs:label>
>>>> Dublin Core Meta Tags
>>>> </rdfs:label>
>>>> </ma:hasKeyword>
>>>>
>>>> There is no language information about keyword in RDF, therefore I
>>>> would suggest to remove the language attribute in the JSON result
>>> set.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Copyright
>>>> JSON
>>>> { "Copyright" : {
>>>> "propertyName" : "copyright",
>>>> "value" : "Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights
>>> reserved.",
>>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc",
>>>> "mappingType" : "related",
>>>> "copyrightLabel" : "Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights
>>>> reserved.",
>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>> }
>>>> RDF:
>>>> <ma:isCopyrightedBy>
>>>> <ma:Organisation>
>>>> <rdfs:label
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">
>>>> Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights reserved.
>>>> </rdfs:label>
>>>> </ma:Organisation>
>>>> </ma:isCopyrightedBy>
>>>>
>>>> DC:
>>>> <dc:rights>
>>>> Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights reserved.
>>>> </dc:rights>
>>>>
>>>> ma:isCopyrightedBy is used to describe the copyright holder not the
>>>> copyright itself (copyrightLabel in JSON). Corresponding JSON
>>>> attribute for ma:isCopyrightedBy is holderLabel.
>>>> Moreover, a copyright.holder is optional, whereas copyright is
>>>> required
>>>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-mediaont-10-20120209/#core-property-
>>>> lists).
>>>> To solve this issue I suggest to turn the existing ma:isCopyrightedBy
>>>> relation into a ma:copyright relation in RDF like this:
>>>>
>>>> <ma:copyright>Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights
>>>> reserved.</ma:copyright>
>>>>
>>>> Another possible solution would be to split the orginal DC data about
>>>> rights into 2 different RDF relations (ma:rights and
>>>> ma:isCopyrightedBy).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My comments about the youtube JSON result document should be
>>> available
>>>> next Monday.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>> Von: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
>>>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Juni 2012 12:41
>>>>> An: Höffernig, Martin
>>>>> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>>>> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code
>>> issues
>>>> /
>>>>> additional issues
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OK it seems there are inconsistencies between the TTL, RDF and XML
>>>>> examples.
>>>>>
>>>>> The TTL files are informative only.
>>>>> The RDF files are normative and serves as the input to the API
>>>>> outputting JSON Responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Therefore RDF and JSON Files MUST be in Synch.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> for example, let see this for the EBUCore tests
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The XMl is incorrect (should not list VENEZUELA location) The RDF
>>> is
>>>>> correct ( lists only VENEZUELA location) The TTL is correct ( lists
>>>>> only VENEZUELA location) The JSON is incorrect (should not list
>>>>> VENEZUELA location)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> see explanation following.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> the EBUCore XML
>>>>> ---------------
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EB
>>>>> U
>>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.xml
>>>>> ...
>>>>> <coverage><spatial><location
>>>>> typeLink="cptype:city"><name>CARACAS</name></location><location
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> typeLink="cptype:country"><name>VENEZUELA</name><code>country:VE</code
>>>>>>
>>>>> </location></spatial></coverage>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --> It provides the "VENEZUELA" location and the "CARACAS" location
>>>>>
>>>>> the EBUCore RDF
>>>>> ---------------
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EB
>>>>> U
>>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.owl
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> <rdf:Description rdf:about="EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS"><rdf:type
>>>>> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/ns/ma-ont#Location"/><rdfs:label
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">CARACAS</rdfs:l
>>>>> a
>>>>> bel></rdf:Description>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> --> It does not provide the "VENEZUELA" location, only the
>>> "CARACAS"
>>>>> location
>>>>>
>>>>> the EBUCore TTL
>>>>> ---------------
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EB
>>>>> U
>>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.ttl
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> <EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS>
>>>>> a ma-ont:Location ;
>>>>> rdfs:label
>>>> "CARACAS"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
>>>>> .
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --> It does not provide the "VENEZUELA" location, only the
>>> "CARACAS"
>>>>> location
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> the EBUCore JSON
>>>>> ---------------
>>>>> ...
>>>>> { "Location" : {
>>>>> "propertyName" : "location",
>>>>> "value" : "CARACAS",
>>>>> "language" : "English",
>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "ebucore",
>>>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>>>> "locationLabel" : "CARACAS",
>>>>> "longitude" : 0,
>>>>> "latitude" : 0,
>>>>> "altitude" : 0,
>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>> }
>>>>> },
>>>>> { "Location" : {
>>>>> "propertyName" : "location",
>>>>> "value" : "VENEZUELA",
>>>>> "language" : "English",
>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "ebucore",
>>>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>>>> "locationLabel" : "VENEZUELA",
>>>>> "longitude" : 0,
>>>>> "latitude" : 0,
>>>>> "altitude" : 0,
>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>> }
>>>>> },
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --> It provides the "VENEZUELA" location and the "CARACAS" location
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 12/06/2012 11:49, Höffernig, Martin a écrit :
>>>>>> Thierry,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> please note that I assume that the corresponding ontology
>>> document
>>>>> only - not the original metadata example - is the basis for
>>> creating
>>>>> JSON response data sets for a given format.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> see my comments in-line.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>>>> Von: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
>>>>>>> Gesendet: Montag, 11. Juni 2012 16:04
>>>>>>> An: Höffernig, Martin
>>>>>>> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues
>>>>>>> / additional issues
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Martin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to focus first on the DC and Youtube formats as
>>>>>>> these are the 2 formats we use for the implementation report.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But indeed we should fix the other formats and have the JSON
>>>>>>> responses in Synch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not sure I understand all the issue raised.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See my responses in line ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thierry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 11/06/2012 14:27, Höffernig, Martin a écrit :
>>>>>>>> Dear Thierry, all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> here is an incomplete list of issues regarding category 3:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> EBUCore:
>>>>>>>> Location - 2 location data sets in JSON response, only 1
>>>>>>>> location present in ontology
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not sure what the issue is. Both seem to have 2 occurences:
>>>>>>> the EBUCore XML
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/
>>>>> E
>>>>>>> BU
>>>>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.xml
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> <coverage><spatial><location
>>>>>>> typeLink="cptype:city"><name>CARACAS</name></location><location
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> typeLink="cptype:country"><name>VENEZUELA</name><code>country:VE</co
>>>>> d
>>>>>>> e>
>>>>>>> </location></spatial></coverage>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> and the JSON
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> { "Location" : {
>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "location",
>>>>>>> "value" : "CARACAS",
>>>>>>> "language" : "English",
>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "ebucore",
>>>>>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>>>>>> "locationLabel" : "CARACAS",
>>>>>>> "longitude" : 0,
>>>>>>> "latitude" : 0,
>>>>>>> "altitude" : 0,
>>>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> },
>>>>>>> { "Location" : {
>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "location",
>>>>>>> "value" : "VENEZUELA",
>>>>>>> "language" : "English",
>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "ebucore",
>>>>>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>>>>>> "locationLabel" : "VENEZUELA",
>>>>>>> "longitude" : 0,
>>>>>>> "latitude" : 0,
>>>>>>> "altitude" : 0,
>>>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> },
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes that's correct. However, in the corresponding ontology
>>> example
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/E
>>>>> B
>>>>> UCoreXML_ITM528229_extended.ttl) only 1 location has been
>>> described,
>>>>> namely EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS (see below).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <tag:ebu.ch,2011:528229>
>>>>>> ma-ont:createdIn<EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS> ;
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS>
>>>>>> a ma-ont:Location ;
>>>>>> rdfs:label
>>>>> "CARACAS"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore, as the ontology document serves as the basis for the
>>>> JSON
>>>>> response, only CARACAS can be part of the JSON result set.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> NamedFragment - NamedFragements in JSON, however no
>>>>>>>> ma:hasNamedFragment relations in ontology
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the EBUCore XML
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/
>>>>> E
>>>>>>> BU
>>>>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.xml
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in the Ontlogy exact mapping from
>>>>>>> namedFragment to hasPart
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since there are no ma:hasNamedFragments relation in the ontology
>>>>> example, no NamedFragments can be part of the JSON result. However,
>>>>> ma:hasFragment relations exist, Fragment properties - not
>>>>> NamedFragments - can be retrieved and part of the JSON response.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Locator - property has been mixed up with Location, contains
>>> the
>>>>>>>> same data
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Exif:
>>>>>>>> FrameSize - JSON contains 2 FrameSize data sets for same media
>>>>>>>> resource, one FrameSize should refer to related thumbnail image
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right the second relates to the thumbnail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ID3:
>>>>>>>> Contributor - roleLabels for Contributor (e.g. "TCOM Composer")
>>>>>>>> not present in ontology
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the ID3 ontology example
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/I
>>>>> D
>>>>> 3_bach.ttl) there is no further role information about
>>> contributors,
>>>>> formalized as sub properties, available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LOM 2.1:
>>>>>>>> FrameSize - present in JSON, no data available in ontology
>>>>>>>> Duration
>>>>>>>> - same issue
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not sure what the issue is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ma:frameSize more general mapping to "size"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> lom example:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> <technical><size>1000</size>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> lom Json:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> { "FrameSize" : {
>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "frameSize",
>>>>>>> "value" : "1000",
>>>>>>> "language" : "English",
>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "lom21",
>>>>>>> "mappingType" : "more general",
>>>>>>> "width" : 0,
>>>>>>> "height" : 0,
>>>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> },
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ma:duration is exact mapping to duration
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> there seems to be a bug here in the Lom example: the duration is
>>>> in
>>>>> a
>>>>>>> comment:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> <!--duration><duration>1H</duration>
>>>>>>> </duration-->
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lom Json:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The duration value set to zero seems wrong (should be one hour)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> { "Duration" : {
>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "duration",
>>>>>>> "language" : "English",
>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "lom21",
>>>>>>> "fragmentIdentifier" : "exact",
>>>>>>> "duration" : 0,
>>>>>>> "statusCode" : 204
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> },
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the LOM ontology example
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/L
>>>>> O
>>>>> M_sample_v1.ttl) there is no data about frame size as well as
>>>> duration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Media RSS:
>>>>>>>> Copyright - holderLink present in JSON, no information
>>> available
>>>>>>>> in ontology
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not sure what the issue is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ma:copyright exact mapping to
>>>>>>> "rss/channel/item/media:content/media:copyright"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MediaRSS example:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> <media:copyright url="http://blah.com/additional-info.html">2005
>>>>>>> FooBar Media</media:copyright> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MediaRSS Json:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> { "Copyright" : {
>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "copyright",
>>>>>>> "value" : "2005 FooBar Media",
>>>>>>> "language" : "en",
>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "mrss",
>>>>>>> "mappingType" : "exact",
>>>>>>> "copyrightLabel" : "2005 FooBar Media",
>>>>>>> "holderLink" : "http://blah.com/additional-info.html",
>>>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no ma:copyright relation in the corresponding ontology
>>>>> document
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/m
>>>>> r
>>>>> ss_sample_rdf.ttl ).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TV-Anytime:
>>>>>>>> TargetAudience - multiple targetAudience result sets present in
>>>>>>>> JSON, only 1 target audience in ontology
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not sure what the issue is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ma:targetAudience related mapping to "Genre"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TVA example:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> <Genre
>>>>>>> href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.1"><Name>Daily
>>>>>>> news</Name></Genre><Genre
>>>>>>> href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.13"><Name>Weather
>>>>>>> forecasts</Name></Genre><Genre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:FormatCS:2005:2.1.1"><Name>Bulletin</Name>
>>>>> <
>>>>>>> /G
>>>>>>> enre><Genre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:IntentionCS:2005:1.2"><Name>INFORM</Name><
>>>>> /
>>>>>>> Ge
>>>>>>> nre><Genre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.9"><Name>Sports</Name
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> </
>>>>>>> Genre>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TVA Json:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> { "TargetAudience" : {
>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "targetAudience",
>>>>>>> "value" : "Weather forecasts",
>>>>>>> "language" : "EN-UK",
>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "tva",
>>>>>>> "mappingType" : "related",
>>>>>>> "audienceLink" :
>>>>> "urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.13",
>>>>>>> "audienceLabel" : "Weather forecasts",
>>>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> },
>>>>>>> { "TargetAudience" : {
>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "targetAudience",
>>>>>>> "value" : "Bulletin",
>>>>>>> "language" : "EN-UK",
>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "tva",
>>>>>>> "mappingType" : "related",
>>>>>>> "audienceLink" :
>>> "urn:tva:metadata:cs:FormatCS:2005:2.1.1",
>>>>>>> "audienceLabel" : "Bulletin",
>>>>>>> "statusCode" : 200
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only 1 ma:TargetAudience instance in ontology docoument
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/T
>>>>> V AXML_2_MAONTRDF_20100914BBCNewsTF_pl_pi_prog22_extended.ttl )
>>>>> available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since my list is incomplete, more sync issues are potentially
>>>>>>> possible. Therefore I suggest to fully revise the JSON files and
>>>>>>> update these files w.r.t the unchanged ontology files.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>>>>>> Von: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
>>>>>>>>> Gesendet: Montag, 11. Juni 2012 12:21
>>>>>>>>> An: tmichel@w3.org
>>>>>>>>> Cc: Höffernig, Martin; public-media-annotation@w3.org; Bailer,
>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues /
>>>>>>>>> additional issues
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Remains now the third category that we may want to naildown
>>>>>>>>> before going to PR
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > I made the observation
>>>>>>>>> > that some JSON response documents are not in sync with
>>>> the>
>>>>>>>>> corresponding ontology examples.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Therefore, MediaAnnotation objects include data which
>>> are
>>>>> not>
>>>>>>>>> present in the corresponding ontology document.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > I thought that the ontology documents should be the
>>> basis
>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> JSON> responses?
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Concerning formats:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > EBUCore, Exif, ID3, LOM, MediaRSS, TV-Anytime
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Could you precise which data are out of sync ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How should we resolve it:
>>>>>>>>> Should we update the output (the JSON Files) or the input
>>>>>>>>> (example and the RDF files in the Ontology testsuite?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thierry
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Le 11/06/2012 11:55, Thierry MICHEL a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>> Martin,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> With the previous publication of your updated JSON files, I
>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> also updated these with the proper status code 200, as
>>>> requested
>>>>>>> bellow.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This should now close the issue for the category 1 and 2.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> thierry.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Le 05/06/2012 12:52, Höffernig, Martin a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have reviewed the API status codes [1] in the normative
>>>>>>>>>>> JSON files of the testsuite implementation [2] and I found
>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>> issues
>>>>>>>>>>> that should be addressed.
>>>>>>>>>>> All of these issues are related to the usage of status code
>>>> 206
>>>>>>>>>>> (partial content).
>>>>>>>>>>> For me, 206 is misused in many cases since its semantics is
>>>>>>>>>>> possibly not quite clear.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think, 206 should be returned in cases where only partial
>>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> available data for a media resource is returned.
>>>>>>>>>>> For example, when requesting the FrameSize property and
>>>>>>>>>>> Height
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>> be returned only, while data about Width is available as
>>> well
>>>>>>>>>>> should result in status code 206.
>>>>>>>>>>> On the other side, when retrieving a location property for
>>>>>>>>>>> which the name of the location (locationLabel) is available
>>>>>>>>>>> only - further information like latitude and longitude is
>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>> - I suggest to return status code 200 (OK), since all the
>>>>>>>>>>> available information will be returned.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Taken my interpretation of the usage of satus code 206 into
>>>>>>>>>>> account, I suggest to change the status code 206 to 200 in
>>>>>>>>>>> for the following MediaAnnotation objects:
>>>>>>>>>>> DIG35:
>>>>>>>>>>> Location, Copyright
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> DublinCore:
>>>>>>>>>>> Contributor, MADate, Location, Relation, Copyright
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> EBUCore:
>>>>>>>>>>> Locator, Location, Creator, Relation, TargetAudience,
>>>>>>>>> NamendFragment,
>>>>>>>>>>> Fragment, FrameSize
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Exif:
>>>>>>>>>>> Copyright, FrameSize
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ID3:
>>>>>>>>>>> Contributor
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> YouTube:
>>>>>>>>>>> TargetAudience
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IPTC:
>>>>>>>>>>> Location, Copyright, Policy, TargetAudience, Fragment,
>>>>>>>>>>> FrameSize
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> LOM 2.1:
>>>>>>>>>>> FrameSize
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Media RSS:
>>>>>>>>>>> Location, Rating, Copyright, Policy, FrameSize
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> TV-Anytime:
>>>>>>>>>>> Relation, TargetAudience
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> TXFeed:
>>>>>>>>>>> Copyright
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> XMP:
>>>>>>>>>>> Contributor, Creator, MADate, Location, Rating, Relation,
>>>>>>>>>>> Copyright, Policy
>>>>>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> YouTube:
>>>>>>>>>>> TargetAudience
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> already Done from above.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, I suggest that in a JSON response,
>>>> MediaAnnotation
>>>>>>>>>>> objects should only contain attributes with associated
>>> values.
>>>>>>>>>>> For example, in the following MediaAnnotation object, the
>>>>>>>>>>> attributes language, fragmentIdentifer, typeLink, and
>>>> typeLabel
>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed, since no value is available for these
>>>>>>> attributes.
>>>>>>>>>>> { "Title" : {
>>>>>>>>>>> "propertyName" : "title",
>>>>>>>>>>> "value" : "Oasis Concert Stage @ I Am A Walrus", "language"
>>> :
>>>>> "",
>>>>>>>>>>> "sourceFormat" : "dig35", "fragmentIdentifier" : "",
>>>>> "mappingType"
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>> "exact", "titleLabel" : "Oasis Concert Stage @ I Am A
>>>>>>>>>>> Walrus", "typeLink" : "", "typeLabel" : "", "statusCode" :
>>>>>>>>>>> 200 }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This issue applies to many MediaAnnotation objects in
>>>> following
>>>>>>>>>>> documents:
>>>>>>>>>>> DIG35, Dublin Core, EBUCore, Exif, ID3, IPTC, LOM, MediaRSS,
>>>>> DMS-
>>>>>>> 1,
>>>>>>>>>>> TV-Anytime, TXFeed, XMP, YouTube
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Moreover, while examining the status codes, I made the
>>>>>>>>>>> observation that some JSON response documents are not in
>>> sync
>>>>>>>>>>> with the corresponding ontology examples.
>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, MediaAnnotation objects include data which are
>>> not
>>>>>>>>> present
>>>>>>>>>>> in the corresponding ontology document.
>>>>>>>>>>> I thought that the ontology documents should be the basis
>>> for
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> JSON responses?
>>>>>>>>>>> Concerning formats:
>>>>>>>>>>> EBUCore, Exif, ID3, LOM, MediaRSS, TV-Anytime
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [1]:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20111122/#api-
>>>>>>> status-
>>>>>>>>> co
>>>>>>>>>>> des
>>>>>>>>>>> [2]:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/TestSuite_implement
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> tion
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hope my observation scan help to improve the JSON documents.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin Höffernig
>>>>>>>>>>> Audiovisual Media Group
>>>>>>>>>>> DIGITAL - Institute for Information and Communication
>>>>>>>>>>> Technologies
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Steyrergasse
>>> 17,
>>>>>>>>>>> 8010 Graz, AUSTRIA
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> phone: +43-316-876-1184
>>>>>>>>>>> general fax: +43-316-876-1191
>>>>>>>>>>> web: http://www.joanneum.at/digital
>>>>>>>>>>> e-mail:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>> martin.hoeffernig@joanneum.at<mailto:martin.hoeffernig@joanneum.at>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 10:12:22 UTC