- From: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
- Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:36:47 +0200
- To: Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>
- CC: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>, public-media-annotation@w3.org
Dear Joakim, Regarding terminology: could we please avoid the term 'Tag', like in 'Top Supported Tags' [1]? I think it is completely inappropriate in the context of this WG. We're talking about annotation properties, a well-defined term in all the metadata community and with a clear distinction with what a tag is or can be! In particular, the properties we are talking about are generally typed. It would clarify the discussion if could forget about 'tagging'. [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top_Supported_Tags > 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 is written: "Entity" is either a "Resource" (abstract concept) or a "Representation" (instance/file); Does it refer to the concepts of Resource and Representation as defined in AWWSW? If yes, then a reference should be provided! Note that the AWWSW task force is currently working on the ontology for that, e.g. http://rdfs.org/ns/http-sem/html There are still looking for the correct term for the super-class of Resource and Representation, but it will definitively *NOT* be 'Entity'. What was wrong with 'Media Objects'? Would 'Media resources' not be good? Best regards. Raphaël -- Raphaël Troncy CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science), Science Park 123, 1098 XG Amsterdam, The Netherlands e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093 Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312 Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Monday, 20 April 2009 12:37:52 UTC