W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > February 2006

[MM] Standards _not_ to discuss in the interoperability draft

From: Jacco van Ossenbruggen <Jacco.van.Ossenbruggen@cwi.nl>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:24:14 +0100
Message-ID: <43E8754E.9000400@cwi.nl>
To: swbp <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

Hi all,

Per my action item [1], and as input for tomorrow's MMTF teleconf, this 
is my personal list of standards I believe should not be included in the 
discussion of the interoperability draft (note this is the MMTF's 2nd 
deliverable, not the image annotation draft we have voted on yesterday). 
Instead, I propose to have an informal appendix that lists these 
standards with a short explanation why we have decided to leave them out.

Jacco

[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/01/26-MMTF-minutes.html#action18

--

IN SCOPE: MPEG7,  VRA, IPTC Core and related standards, Getty 
Vocabularies, EXIF, CIDOC-CRM, MIME, WAI WCAG 2.0 , CC/PP

OUT OF SCOPE:
- Dublin Core: There is an official RDF syntax, and interoperability 
between non-RDF and RDF serializations of DC are not a MM-specific problem.
- TV-Anytime: This is a good standard to include in future work, but for 
now it is out of scope for a draft that is focused on images only
- EBU metadata: idem
- SMPTE: idem
- FOAF: not MM specific, no compatibility problems between RDF and 
non-RDF representations
 -Media Streams: Licensing problems, not publicly available, not used 
outside its original local (research) context
- PREMO: dead standard
-OAI-MPH: No MM-specifics here

NOT SURE
- MPEG-21: Maybe a bit too early?  Standard not finished yet.
- UNIMARC, AMICO & IMS: I do not know this well enough to have an opinion
- Modality Theory-based vocabularies: feels like future work (XG?)
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 10:24:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:46 UTC