W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-mmsem@w3.org > November 2006

RE: [MMSEM-Vocabulary] Request for contribution

From: Hausenblas, Michael <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 23:10:56 +0100
Message-ID: <768DACDC356ED04EA1F1130F97D29852085458@RZJC2EX.jr1.local>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>, <oscar.celma@iua.upf.edu>
Cc: "Christian Halaschek-Wiener" <halasche@cs.umd.edu>, "MMSem-XG Public List" <public-xg-mmsem@w3.org>

RaphaŽl, Oscar, All,
Thanks for the comments - I like the page as well ;)
For now, the following issues have been touched:
1. Section 2/Categorization: Clarified and added legend
2. Section 3/Structure: Grouped the MM standards according to media type (and using other criteria) -  what do you think?
3. The issues with section 4/5 are not so clear to me - maybe we can discuss this at our tomorrows telecon?
4. W.r.t. the audio MM standards IMHO a bit of expertise from Oscar would be of great help ... :)
So long - hear you in some 20h!
 Michael Hausenblas, MSc.
 Institute of Information Systems & Information Management
 JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
 Steyrergasse 17, A-8010 Graz, AUSTRIA

    phone: +43-316-876-1193 (fax:-1191)  
   e-mail: michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at
      web: http://www.joanneum.at/iis/ <https://webmail.joanneum.at/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.joanneum.at/iis/> 

   mobile: +43-660-7621761
      web: http://www.sw-app.org/ <https://webmail.joanneum.at/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.sw-app.org/> 


From: RaphaŽl Troncy [mailto:Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl]
Sent: Wed 2006-10-25 17:25
To: Hausenblas, Michael
Cc: Christian Halaschek-Wiener; MMSem-XG Public List
Subject: Re: [MMSEM-Vocabulary] Request for contribution

Dear Michael and Chris,

It is an amazing work !!! Thanks you very much.
This page looks every day better :-)
Some remarks:
    - I like your section 2, and the categorization proposed by Barry Smith,
but I have to admit that I don't understand the "Code" field of the table
:-s Use the color to mark the name of the category, not only the examples.
    - I like the distinction between the section 3 and 5, that is the
current existing vocabularies, in their original form, and their SW
conversion. I would put the section 5 in 4 ...
    - The section 4 needs still to be precised to see if it will be useful.
Take care that any comparison is biaised with the goal of the comparison,
that will certainly be different from an application / user to another. You
might want to stick to a purely description of the existing resources, and
keep your comparison for a scientific paper you would like to publish :-)
    - I think the section 3 in its current form is quite indigest. I'm
wondering if we could somewhere further categorize these vocabularies, maybe
according to the type of media they concern, but any other classification is
welcome !
Furthermore, are "All Music Guide (AMG)", "MusicBrainz Metadata Initiative
2.1" and "Compact Disc Database (CDDB)" really vocabularies ?

About your request, I will try to update the NewsML and TVAnytime
description soon.


RaphaŽl Troncy
CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science),
Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093
Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312
Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2006 22:11:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:01:24 UTC