[MM] Status public image annotation draft

Dear Jacco

Thank you for your e-mail. I agree with your TODO list. Trying to split down
a little bit more the work on Mike's comments, I would say that in the
current form of the editors' draft, the following comments of Mike should be
covered:

1. The objectives of the document need to be more clear, and more
exciting

2. More emphasis needs to be made on motivating the benefits of
semantic technologies, whey should anyone bother to read this document?

3. The descriptions of the use cases need to be presented in a
consistent manner

4. The solutions of the use cases need to go into the main
document, at least in detailed summary form.

5. Overall, the document seems somewhat bitty, disconnected, a nice
coherent story does not emerge with the pieces connected in a natural way.
It looks like the pieces were independently written and pasted together with
just a skeleton plan about how they should be integrated into a
smooth-flowing document.

>From your TODO list, it is Jacco's and Jeff's work to take care of the above
comments. Since I think that it is a lot of work for this week, I volunteer
to help you. Please assign some work to me.

Cheers
Giorgos 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Jacco van Ossenbruggen
> Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2005 9:54 PM
> To: swbp
> Subject: [MM/All/Ralph] Status public image annotation draft
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> My apologies for not being able to work on the draft since Galway.  I
> will try to catch up in the coming weeks.
> 
> I've drafted a TODO list with things that need to be done, the first of
> which should preferably be done before we go public with the image
> annotation note. I've tentatively assigned names to the action points,
> if your name is there while you do not agree, please let me know.
> 
>  From the face to face in Galway, three things where still open:
> 
> 1. Possible patent issue (STILL OPEN, Action Ralph)
> Thanks Jeremy for providing the requested pointers.  Ralph, could you
> ask Daniel Weitzner what his position in this is?  The thread on
> patent-issues seems to have died after Daniel's message [1]. As a
> non-native speaker and a non-legal expert, I'm not sure how to reply to
> Daniel's message.
> 
> 2. Status Jane Hunter (RESOLVED)
> AFAIK, Jane completed the forms and is now an invited expert of the
> SWBPD WG.  Ralph, please correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> 3. Process comments from Mike (ACTION OPEN, Jacco & Jeff)
> Jeff started editing the draft based on Mike's comments, but many things
>   still need to be done.  I expect to complete the work on this next
> week, and hope to get some help from Jeff.
> 
> So I hope that if the we get the patent stuff sorted out and process
> Mike's comments we can start the process to publish the first public
> draft soon.
> 
> Other things that need to be done but could be done after going public:
> - Add medical and/or life science use case (Jane, Jacco),
> - Add IPTC News use case (Raphael, Jacco, Misha Wolf?)
> - Add solution to media production use case (Giorgos).
> 
> Note that the timing seems right to go public and ask for feedback from
> a broader audience asap.  At the EWIMT workshop [2] in London previous
> week there was much interest in the work of the MMTF. In a complementary
> track, the aceMedia project agreed to start collecting requirements for
> a potential common multimedia ontology framework, and of course we will
> keep this list up to date on developments in this area. We also agreed
> to collaborate between the work of the MMTF on the image vocabulary
> repository and the aims of the aceMedia project to build a mm vocabulary
> repository.
> 
> Jacco
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0114.html
> [2] http://www.acemedia.org/ewimt2005/

Received on Monday, 12 December 2005 11:15:30 UTC