Re: draft for "Canonical Processes" Use Case and updates to the UC and Req document

Hello Veronique,


2009/4/2 Veronique Malaise <vmalaise@few.vu.nl>

> Hello Felix,
>
> I could probably come up with an example, I could also borrow the one
> developped by Raphael at the workshop of the SAMT conference, if this could
> be authorised :)
>


That would be great :)



> The problem is not so much of passing on metadata as such, it is that the
> metadata are encoded in different formats that are not dealt with in the
> other processes, although some properties might be interesting to propagate:
> some keywords or tags, creating date etc can be assigned at different
> moments in the life cycle, but expressed in different metadata schemas.
> Which is the part where the Ontology could have a role to play. If I
> understood correctly, of course :)
>


Probably you have - and I do not disagree with you. Nevertheless, from a
recent event at a the local film studio and discussion with experts in the
area, I have the impression that in movie industry business reality both is
an issue - that is, setting up the chain between the hundreds or thousands
of people in video / movie production, and being able to pass properties
along the way. Do we have people on this list who are in video / movie
production and could comment on that?

Felix



>
> Best,
> Véronique
>
>
> On Apr 2, 2009, at 4:27 PM, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
> Hello Veronique,
>
> the text looks good to me, but I have two questions: Do you have an example
> of a property which specifically would help for the "Canonical Processes"
> use case? Also, is the problem not an issue of information management in the
> media life cycle, and has to be solved in that area, at least in addition to
> the ontology?
>
> Felix
>
> 2009/4/2 Veronique Malaise <vmalaise@few.vu.nl>
>
>> Hi everyone!
>>
>> Following my Action Item, here is a draft of a Use case that would
>> correspond to the "canonical processes" applied to a media document, as
>> discussed in the last teleconference (). All comments are welcome!
>>
>> I also updated the current Use Case and Requirement document according to
>> the list's comments and reactions.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Véronique
>>
>> Title: Canonical Processes Use Case
>>
>> Summary: The life cycle of a media document undergoes different processes,
>> which have all different canonical metadata properties and schemas. It is
>> not trivial to pass on valuable metadata, generated during one process, to
>> the next process. The Media Ontology could enhance the transmission of
>> metadata in this chain that has been identified as the "Canonical Processes"
>> [1]
>>
>> Related Requirements:
>> Requirement r01: Providing methods for getting structured or unstructured
>> metadata out of media objects in different formats
>> Requirement r05: Providing the ontology as a simple set of properties
>>
>> Description / Example:
>> As described in [1]:
>> "Creating compelling multimedia presentations is a complex
>> task. It involves the capture of media assets, then editing
>> and authoring these into one or more final presentations.
>> Tools tend to concentrate on a single aspect to reduce the
>> complexity of the interface. While these tools are tailored to
>> support a specific task, very often there is no consideration
>> for input requirements for the next tool down the line. Each
>> tool has the potential for adding semantic annotations to the
>> media asset, describing relevant aspects of the asset and why
>> it is being used for a particular purpose. These annotations
>> need to be included in the information handed on to the
>> next tool."
>> The Media Ontology would help the information transfer or access between
>> these different processes.
>>
>> [1] Lynda Hardman. Canonical Processes of Media Production. In Proceedings
>> of the ACM Workshop on Multimedia for Human Communication - From Capture to
>> Convey (MHC 05), November 11, 2005.
>>
>
>
>