- From: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:05:12 +0900
- To: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
- Message-ID: <ba4134970906230605l77d6cd32u1f3a8dfd19aca255@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks, added to http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Test_data Best, Felix 2009/6/23 Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com> > Hello! > > >> > >> >> I just came across the following table: > >> >> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/FeaturesTable > >> >> which (I hope, otherwise just ignore this email) is maintained by > this > >> >> group. > >> >> > >> >> Does the scope of the ontology you aim at developing also encompass > >> >> audio and music? I was wondering at that when I saw ID3 mentioned in > >> >> the table. > >> >> > >> > > >> > The main focus of our group is video. We are also looking into other > >> > multimedia vocabularies, including ID3. However, I cannot tell (yet) > to > >> > what > >> > extend these will be taken into account. > >> > >> First of all, congratulations on the public draft! > > > > Thank you for the flowers :) > > > >> > >> > >> At this occasion, I just took a look at the latest mapping table, and > >> a few audio or music-related format are taken into account - thanks :) > >> When reading the table, I noticed that the mapping to your core > >> properties from existing formats worked really well for flat schemas > >> (e.g. DC or ID3), but the explanations of the mapping for other > >> (non-flat) schemas were missing. For example, ma:keyword is mapped to > >> adaptationOf in FRBR, and ma:title is mapped to realizationOf / > >> embodymentOf / exemplarOf. It is quite hard to guess (even for > >> FRBR-savvy people) what that could mean, and how we could proceed to > >> write a mapper from a FRBR-based vocabulary (e.g. Music Ontology) to > >> the Ontology for Media Resource. > > > > I completely understand your problem. To be able to solve it, some test > data > > would be very helpful. Could you send us some prototypical test data you > > would use for your mapper? > > Yes, of course! Here is the RDF snippet I used (stripping out the > unneeded stuff wrt. ma:title) > > > @prefix mo: <http://purl.org/ontology/mo/> . > @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> . > @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> . > @prefix : <#> . > > :work > a mo:MusicalWork ; > dc:title "Franz Schubert's Trout Quintet" . > > :performance > a mo:Performance ; > dc:title "Trout Quintet, performed by the LSO" ; > mo:performance_of :work ; > mo:recorded_as [ > a mo:Signal ; > mo:published_as :track1 ; > dc:title "Recording of the LSO performing the Trout Quintet" ; > ] . > > :track1 > a mo:Track ; > mo:track_number 5 ; > owl:sameAs < > http://dbtune.org/musicbrainz/resource/track/3208fbce-c20f-4362-a3d5-5405ac1904bd > > > ; > dc:title "Trout Quintet, performed by the LSO, on 'Favorite Classics'" . > > > So as you can see, this RDF describes a particular track in my > collection, and holds three dc:title. It looks like the mapping table, > for FRBR (on which this snippet is based), suggests that I should use > a specific level of abstraction (the work, the performance or the > track) to generate ma:title, but the mapping just says "realizationOf, > embodimentOf and exemplarOf". > > I hope that helps! > > Cheers, > y >
Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2009 13:05:51 UTC