- From: Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 13:48:37 +0200
- To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>, <Chris.Poppe@UGent.be>, "Veronique Malaise" <vmalaise@few.vu.nl>, "Florian Stegmaier" <stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de>
- Cc: <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
> > > Finally, would it be an alternative to state that the Media > > Entity is the > > abstract concept (representing an object or set of fragments) and the > > Resource be the actual instance of that entity? (In fact this is the > > definition of a Resource within MPEG-21) > > I agree that this argument makes sense. However, as pointed out, the > fragments group uses the term "resource", and if we e.g. use a URN with a > fragment identifier (e.g. to reference a named fragment in a movie without > referring to a specific version) it is not a resource in the sense of this > definition. During a joint session with Media Frag Group (in Barcelona) we introduced "media entity" because we wanted to have a word that could mean either a "resource" or a "representation". During a telcon after the 3rd F2F, it was argued whether "media entity" was inappropriate. As far as I can recall we decided to keep the expression but try to come up with something better!? /Joakim > > Best regards, > Werner > > > > > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > > Van: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org > > [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] Namens > > Veronique Malaise > > Verzonden: dinsdag 19 mei 2009 10:04 > > Aan: Florian Stegmaier > > CC: public-media-annotation@w3.org > > Onderwerp: Re: Regrets for tomorrow`s Telecon (19.05.09) > > > > Dear all, > > > > You will find in attachment the html file of the Media Ontology > > document, please consider only the section "2.1 Terminology", that > > Florian and I have revised. We would be interested in your feedback > > about this section! I hope that we made the different notions a bit > > clearer :) > > The rest of the document is currently under revision by Wonsuk, to > > whom we will send the section "2.1 Terminology" if the group agrees > > with this version. > > > > Best regards, > > Véronique > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 19 May 2009 11:49:15 UTC