- From: BigBlueHat via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 14:04:55 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
@stain's got an interesting point with the YouTube URL with the
Sound-related annotation. However, I'm not sure providing a `dctypes`
value would actually make the accuracy of the annotation any
better--as these days there's likely to be more than one video (ads,
etc) on a YouTube (etc) page and therefore more than one "Sound."
Allowing the video itself within that page to be annotated while not
*only* referencing the buried URL of the actual video--which you can't
actually find/get without some serious XHR sniffing.
Additionally, there'd be a need to express that one was talking about
the sound of the embedded "actual" video vs. just some "Sound" on the
URL which loaded the page in which the video was originally found.
Here's where it gets fun, though. :smile:
That YouTube URL--which actually *does* contain microdata using
schema.org says the following (output from copy/pasting microdata HTML
into http://foolip.org/microdatajs/live/ and then nursing it into
JSON-LD with help of http://json-ld.org/playground/):
```json
{
"@context": "http://schema.org/",
"@id": "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOpUL_hqNlU",
"properties": {
"author": [
{
"properties": {
"url": "http://www.youtube.com/user/Quart35"
},
"type": "http://schema.org/Person"
},
{
"properties": {
"url": "https://plus.google.com/110198108412316165411"
},
"type": "http://schema.org/Person"
}
],
"channelId": "UCgiagVp0FL612Q2nRHJAtQw",
"datePublished": "2010-05-01",
"description": "Kool & The Gang: Get Down On It Tavares: C'est La
Vie Eddy Huntington: Up & Down Italian Boys: Forever Lovers Morgana:
Ready For Love Kool & The Gang: Fresh ...",
"duration": "PT9M27S",
"embedURL": "https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZOpUL_hqNlU",
"genre": "Music",
"height": "360",
"interactionCount": "89144",
"isFamilyFriendly": "True",
"name": "Max Mix 5 (2ยช Parte)",
"paid": "False",
"playerType": "HTML5 Flash",
"regionsAllowed":
"AD,AE,AF,AG,AI,AL,AM,AO,AQ,AR,AS,AT,AU,AW,AX,AZ,BA,BB,BD,BE,BF,BG,BH,BI,BJ,BL,BM,BN,BO,BQ,BR,BS,BT,BV,BW,BY,BZ,CA,CC,CD,CF,CG,CH,CI,CK,CL,CM,CN,CO,CR,CU,CV,CW,CX,CY,CZ,DE,DJ,DK,DM,DO,DZ,EC,EE,EG,EH,ER,ES,ET,FI,FJ,FK,FM,FO,FR,GA,GB,GD,GE,GF,GG,GH,GI,GL,GM,GN,GP,GQ,GR,GS,GT,GU,GW,GY,HK,HM,HN,HR,HT,HU,ID,IE,IL,IM,IN,IO,IQ,IR,IS,IT,JE,JM,JO,JP,KE,KG,KH,KI,KM,KN,KP,KR,KW,KY,KZ,LA,LB,LC,LI,LK,LR,LS,LT,LU,LV,LY,MA,MC,MD,ME,MF,MG,MH,MK,ML,MM,MN,MO,MP,MQ,MR,MS,MT,MU,MV,MW,MX,MY,MZ,NA,NC,NE,NF,NG,NI,NL,NO,NP,NR,NU,NZ,OM,PA,PE,PF,PG,PH,PK,PL,PM,PN,PR,PS,PT,PW,PY,QA,RE,RO,RS,RU,RW,SA,SB,SC,SD,SE,SG,SH,SI,SJ,SK,SL,SM,SN,SO,SR,SS,ST,SV,SX,SY,SZ,TC,TD,TF,TG,TH,TJ,TK,TL,TM,TN,TO,TR,TT,TV,TW,TZ,UA,UG,UM,US,UY,UZ,VA,VC,VE,VG,VI,VN,VU,WF,WS,YE,YT,ZA,ZM,ZW",
"thumbnail": {
"properties": {
"height": "360",
"url": "https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZOpUL_hqNlU/hqdefault.jpg",
"width": "480"
},
"type": "http://schema.org/ImageObject"
},
"thumbnailUrl":
"https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZOpUL_hqNlU/hqdefault.jpg",
"unlisted": "False",
"url": "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOpUL_hqNlU",
"videoId": "ZOpUL_hqNlU",
"width": "480"
},
"type": "http://schema.org/VideoObject"
}
```
Things of note:
- there's no [`contentUrl`](https://schema.org/contentUrl)...so you
can't actually annotate the video content
- `url` resolves to the HTML YouTube page we're all familiar
with...which this schema.org stuff is stating is a
`VideoObject`...https://schema.org/url "URL of the item."
- there's a "magic string" `genre` value of `Music`...but pretty sure
that could be a music video as well as "just" audio (+/- a
placeholder image)
- `embedUrl` is closer to the actual video (less HTML), but still not
the actual video
So, given that (common) scenario (and this case there's actually
metadata!), would `dctypes` be sufficient for providing clarity?
Certainly providing `format` here would not get you any useful value /
clarity as the YouTube URL can (afaik) only return HTML, so adding
`"format": "video/ogg"` (as if...) wouldn't make any difference in
accuracy...and in fact be worse.
It's a tangled mess to be certain. Perhaps lower the `SHOULD` to a
`MAY` would do the trick. Good discussion regardless. :smile:
--
GitHub Notif of comment by BigBlueHat
See
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/67#issuecomment-135445205
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2015 14:04:59 UTC