Re: Semantic media retrieval UC : an update

Dear Raphael,

The update of the UC on Semantic media retrieval has been done
by taking into consideration your comments expressed in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-mmsem/2006Oct/0060.html

You may find in the following, how those comments have been addressed in the update

--- Comment 1 ---
1) I found your examples, not enough "example" ! You still keep a very general and sometimes "vague" level of discourse. To help you, for instance in the Example 3, give us a web page with a picture and its caption. Tell us what kind of information some text analysis techniques could give you. Then tell us how your face analysis will use this information as input to better detect the person of this web page ... In other words, be concrete :-) 
---

I tried to provide a higher degree of detail in the description of my examples 
Additionally, I have given Figures, where appropriate.
eg. see Fig. 1 


--- Comment 2 ---
 2) Before your motivating examples, you might first discuss the problems you would like to tackle. It seems to me that your concerns are: 
        . How to better do cross-modality analysis, and better exchange the results of each single modality analysis ? see Example 3 
        . How to include some fuzziness in the representation of the analysis results (some degree of confidence), and how to merge this fuzzy information with the true/false knowledge if an ontology ? see Example 2 
        . How to add semantics to the representation of low-level descriptors so they become more exchangable ? see Example 1 
---

In the new version, I discarded Example 2 and I tried to further develop upon Examples 1, 3.
For clarity purposes, the main problem that needs to be tackled is given as a title at each Example


--- Comment 3 ---
3) I don't get exactly what you mean in your Example 1. When you say that "To enable a semantic interoperability it is not adequate to permit the exchange of low-level features between different users", would you mean, it is not wishable ? or do just remark that in the current situation, MPEG-7 does not allow such an exchange because of its lack of formal semantics ? And what do you suggest for solving this issue: provide a formal semantics to these low-level MPEG-7 descriptors ? Or simply do not exchange this information ? ... 
I don't get after the problems with parts of images. Could you clarify this point ?
---

In your first question, I mean that there is a lack of formal semantics.
My suggestion to this problem is stated by the updated Solution to Example 1

'The problems with parts of images' was referring to a technical problem with low level feature computation.
There is no need to appear in the updated text. Thus, it is discared.


-------------------

Again, I would like to thank you for your comments.
Don't hesitate to contact me for any further question.

with my best regards,

Ioannis





  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Raphael Troncy 
  To: iit.demokritos.gr 
  Cc: public-xg-mmsem@w3.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 9:23 PM
  Subject: Re: Semantic media retrieval UC : an update


  Dear Ioannis, 
    Have a look at the updated UC on Semantic media retrieval.http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/mmsem/wiki/Semantic_Media_Retrieval_Use_casePlease, don't hesitate to express either comments or any direct additions to the existing UC description.
  Have you addressed the comments in  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-mmsem/2006Oct/0060.html ? 
  If yes, could you please send a detailed answer to these comments showing how you have addressed them ? 
  Best regards. 
      Raphael 

  -- 
  Raphael 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/