- 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