Re: Is the same video but in different encodings the owl:sameAs?

> Thanks yet another time for your insightful comments. I will most
> probably go with the "FRBR-ish" approach then by giving my <video>
> elements an ID, sans explicitly using FRBR terms…

The Europeana Data Model (EDM) goes to quite some lengths to distinguish
between similar-but-not-the-same representations of cultural heritage
objects. Take a look at the EDM Primer for more info:

http://pro.europeana.eu/edm-documentation

E.g., they want to distinguish between Europeana consolidated resource
describing a particular painting and the same painting as provided by
different partners (as each partner might have their own metadata set
describing the object, and you don't want to loose this information by
making them all the same resource).

Your use case is different but there are some similarities.

Cheers,
Uldis



On 6 December 2013 13:39, Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com> wrote:

> [+mamund CHEZ yahoo POINT com]
>
> Dear Public-LOD,
>
> Thanks yet another time for your insightful comments. I will most
> probably go with the "FRBR-ish" approach then by giving my <video>
> elements an ID, sans explicitly using FRBR terms…
>
>   <http://videos.example.org/#video> a ma:MediaResource .
>   <http://videos.example.org/#video> ma:title "Sample Video" .
>   <http://videos.example.org/#video> ma:description "Sample Description" .
>   <http://videos.example.org/#video> ma:locator <http://ex.org/video.mp4>
> .
>   <http://videos.example.org/#video> ma:locator <http://ex.org/video.ogv>
> .
>
> The whole discussion spawned off an interesting side discussion here
> and on Twitter [1] on how HTTP content negotiation and client-side
> "content negotiation" (note the quotes) works with <video>.
>
> Mike Amundsen (CC'ed) then built the bridge to Web images, where upon
> reading up on its history (/me too young) I stumbled upon this quote
> [2] from 1993:
>
> "Actually, the image reading routines we're currently using figure out
> the image format on the fly, so the filename extension won't even be
> significant."
>
> Interesting… Thanks again all on this thread for helping me out!
>
> Cheers,
> Tom
>
> --
> [1] https://twitter.com/tomayac/status/408889842849054720
> [2] http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0257.html
>
> --
> Thomas Steiner, Employee, Google Inc.
> http://blog.tomayac.com, http://twitter.com/tomayac
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
>
> iFy0uwAntT0bE3xtRa5AfeCheCkthAtTh3reSabiGbl0ck0fjumBl3DCharaCTersAttH3b0ttom.hTtP5://xKcd.c0m/1181/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>