- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:55:29 +0900
- To: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <victorr@ac.upc.edu>
- CC: Pierre-Antoine Champin <swlists-040405@champin.net>, Rubén Tous <rtous@ac.upc.edu>, public-media-annotation@w3.org
Hello Victor, all, I agree that such a distinction is possible. I am not sure if it is relevant for our Working Group, since our main task is to provide interoperability between metadata formats - to a certain extend. We have to make a tradeoff between detailedness of abstraction and complexity. I think for the task of interoperability between formats, it would be sufficient to not make the distinction you describe. I might be wrong, but it would be great to see examples of approaches towards interoperability, like the metadata working group one, which prove me wrong. This is a chicken and egg problem, but I am worried that we take too much on our plate and go too far away from existing pratice. Felix Víctor Rodríguez Doncel さんは書きました: > > Hello all, > > I think it should be distinguished between the user roles regarding > the resource, and the user roles regarding the represented object. > Thus, the three kind of applications or roles defined by the > metadataworkinggroup (creator/changer/consumer) operate on the > resource but may not match logically the role regarding the > represented object. > > For example, the word "creator" is somewhat ambiguous because it may > refer to the role which creates materially the resource, or to the > actual artist which conceives an idea. Both "creators" do not > necessarily match. Have you thought about it? > > Regards, > Víctor Rodríguez Doncel > > > Felix Sasaki escribió: >> >> Pierre-Antoine Champin さんは書きました: >>> Felix Sasaki a écrit : >>>> >>>> Hello Ruben, all, >>>> >>>> sorry for the late reply. Reading your proposal I think it is >>>> interesting for the photo use case. However I remember that we >>>> discussed at the f2f meeting about the focus of the Working Group, >>>> and most of the people want it to be video, with the possibility to >>>> take other use cases into account if their requirements overlap >>>> more or less with video.I am a bit worried that your description is >>>> too far away from that use case. What do others think? >>> >>> >>> Although the examples given by Rubén are quite specific to still >>> images, it seems to me that a similar kind of concern exist for >>> video: video can be digitalized from analog media, captured by >>> digital devices or generated; they can be altered in several ways >>> (re-encoding, subtitling, montage...). >> >> Good point. I think an implementation of this is to separate actors >> or roles like creator, changer and consumer. This is what the >> metadata working group deliverable does, see section 2 of >> http://www.metadataworkinggroup.com/pdf/mwg_guidance.pdf >> However what you are mentioning and what Ruben describes sounds to me >> rather like a requirement than a use case, that is the requirement to >> take such roles into account for relating various metadata >> vocabularies. What do you think? >> >> Felix >> >> >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2008 08:56:23 UTC