Re: F2F 3 and call for comments

Hi Joakim,

thank you for the clarification. I hope that my comments are still
understandable, and I will use the new vocabulary from now on. Regarding the
next f2f, probably I will still only participate remotely , but hopefully
this time for two full days. I guess it is 25th-26th June?

Best,

Felix

2009/4/20 Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>

>  Hi Felix,
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
>
>
> One thing; on Friday we decided to not talk about “media objects” anymore,
> but “media entities”. A media entity can be both a resource and a
> representation. See introduction to:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top_Supported_Tags
>
>
>
> It was a pity that you couldn’t come to Barcelona, but maybe we will see
> you in Stockholm for the 4th F2F, planned to take place the 25th June?
>
>
>
> /Joakim
>
>
>
>
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* felix.sasaki@googlemail.com [mailto:felix.sasaki@googlemail.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Felix Sasaki
> *Sent:* den 19 april 2009 21:44
> *To:* Joakim Söderberg
> *Cc:* public-media-annotation@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: F2F 3 and call for comments
>
>
>
> Dear Joakim, all,
>
> congratulations to this result, and sorry that I could not participate in
> the 2nd day of the f2f. This is an important step forward for the success of
> this Working Group!
>
> Some comments on subsequent steps, maybe you have discussed them already,
> maybe we can discuss them briefly during the next call.
>
> 1) The value of this Working Group is two-folded: first, provide a common
> vocabulary for media annotations on the web, and second, describe relations
> of exisiting formats towards these annotions. We should continue to work on
> these existing relations, by getting feedback about them from outside the
> working group, via public working drafts with the whole mapping table. Of
> course, this table needs to be changed so that the "new" properties are in
> the center. This is no fun, but IMO very important.
>
> 2) This is also important since we need it for the API which uses that
> information for operations like "getAuthor(mediaObjectURI)" , hiding the
> underlying format. It then is also important for getting us through the CR
> phase - remember the testable assertions we discussed like "check if two
> implementations get the same results for the same method".
>
>
> A few comments on the table:
>
> the youtube data api conflats creator and contributor into author
>
> http://code.google.com/intl/en/apis/youtube/2.0/reference.html#youtube_data_api_tag_author
> we should get feedback from the developers whether our approach creates
> problems for them.
>
> ma:language should be definded in terms of BCP 47, which is like a "latest
> version for language tags" (RFC 1766, 3066, 4646, soon another one to come).
> See http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt
>
> There is an otherlap between ma:language and ma:location since language
> identifiers can contain location information as well. No need to conflate
> these, but the overlap should be explained.
>
> Again - congratulations on this good progress, and I am looking forward for
> more!
>
> Felix
>
> 2009/4/19 Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>
>
> Folks,
>
> The third F2F was successfully conducted at UPC in Barcelona.
>
> Thanks to the hosts and all present participants! You did a really good job
> and we had some very constructive and discussions.
>
>
>
> As a result of this meeting we now have a set of “Media Annotations
> Attributes”. It is a very important result since it will be the foundation
> of our second publication “Media Entity Ontology”.
>
> THIS IS CALL TO ALL PARTICIPANTS OF MEDIA ANNOTATIONS WG TO PLEASE STUDY
> THIS TABLE AND PROVIDE COMMENTS! The table can be found on our Wiki:
>
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top_Supported_Tags
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Joakim
>
>
>