W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > September 2009

RE: PFWG review of Ontology for Media Resource 1.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-mediaont-10-20090618/

From: Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 22:01:47 +0200
Message-ID: <4055256AED9D224D9442B19BF1C4C490043FCF0C@esealmw118.eemea.ericsson.se>
To: "Michael Cooper" <cooper@w3.org>, <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Cc: "List WAI Liaison" <wai-liaison@w3.org>
Dear Mr. Cooper, dear all,

On behalf on the Media Annotations WG I like to express our gratitude for the feedback. Here is our response to your comments:



Comment 1: Property for alternate versions


The basic functionality for getting alternate versions is indeed covered by ma:relation. The value of the ma:relation property contains the URI of the alternate resource. It's MIME type, location and other properties can be queried by a subsequent request for annotations about the URI of the alternate content. The ma:relation property has a qualifier that allows to specify the type of relation. The definition of these lists of qualifiers is currently ongoing. 


We have already a note about accessibility metadata on our Wiki page for possible properties to be considered in future [1], mentioning links to transcripts, audio description of video etc. We plan to review whether the mechanism provided by ma:relation and qualifiers is sufficient to cover these requirements and will consider additional properties if necessary.



Comment 2: Property for dependencies


We have tried to restrict technical properties to a minimum and included only those well motivated by the collected use cases [2]. We have not considered properties that are specific to a small set of content types or that are only needed by the player itself. Of course, as you mentioned, a property such as terms:requires could be useful in some for content selection before. We have added it to the list of possible future properties and we will discuss about it in due time. 


[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Candidate_Additional_Elements <http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Candidate_Additional_Elements> 

[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/media-annot-reqs/ <http://www.w3.org/TR/media-annot-reqs/> 



Best Regards

Joakim Söderberg



Joakim Söderberg, M.Sc, Ph.D Multimedia Indexing

Chair W3C Media Annotations Working Group

Senior Research Engineer, Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research




From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael Cooper
Sent: den 21 juli 2009 17:28
To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Cc: List WAI Liaison
Subject: PFWG review of Ontology for Media Resource 1.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-mediaont-10-20090618/


This is feedback from the Protocols and Formats Working Group on the 18 June 2009 WD of Ontology for Media Resource 1.0 <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-mediaont-10-20090618/> . Group consensus to send this feedback is recorded at http://www.w3.org/2009/07/15-pf-minutes#item05. This review is focused solely on accessibility implications of the draft spec.

Comment 1: Property for alternate versions

We request that you provide a property to indicate the location of alternate versions (complete with the MIME type and location, and keeping in mind that alternate versions of resources often have different granularities so have to be referenced carefully). This might correspond to the DCMI Metadata Terms hasFormat http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-mediaont-10-20090618/ or isFormatOf http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-isFormatOf. It is possible that the ma:relation property fulfills this function but if so this needs to be documented more clearly, including explanation of accessibility use cases (ability to find alternate formats, including transcriptions, captions, etc. of the "same" media).

Comment 2: Property for dependencies

It would be important to have a property corresponding to DCMI Metadata Terms requires http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-requires. This would be to indicate if the media requires something else to be played. If it requires something else known to be inaccessible on the user's system, then the media could be known to be unplayable from its metadata.

Michael Cooper
Team Contact, PFWG


Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org> 
Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/> 
Received on Sunday, 13 September 2009 20:02:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:24:37 UTC