Re: RE : Next iteration of the RDF ontology

Dear Mari-Carmen,

thanks also from my side for the feedback and thanks to Jean-Pierre for
answering your questions!

What I wanted to add is, that you, Mari-Carmen, looked at an old version of
the ontology. The most recent version was sent around with this mail:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2010Nov/0130.html

Best regards,

Tobias

2010/12/2 Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>

> Hello Mari-Carmen,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> I'll first try to summarise what the intention was and then we'll come back
> to your specific points.
>
> The idea of the current class model is:
>
> A MediaResource can be one or more images and /or one or more AV
> MediaFragment.
>
> By definition, in the model, an AV MediaResource is made of at least one
> MediaFragment.
>
> A MediaFragment is the equivalent of a segment or in some standards like
> NewsML-g2 or EBUCore, a part.
>
> A MediaFragment is composed of one or more media components organised in
> tracks (separate tracks for captioning/subtitling or signing if provided in
> a separate file): audio, video, captioning/subtitling, signing. There could
> be other types of tracks like a 'data' track, etc.
>
> Addressing some of your remarks:
>
> - a frame could be a MediaFragment with a duration of one frame and if you
> wnat to address only the farme as a video frame then the component is the
> VideoTrack. We could have segment and frame as possible media fragments in
> the definition
> - an image could also be a key frame
> - as mentioned above captioning is the same as subtitle and this should be
> mentioned in the definitions if you think it helps.
>
> For isFragmentOf,  I'll come back to you tomorrow.
>
> It took me 48 hours to return from Paris making me a climatic refugee going
> from airports to train stations. That's exactly when my main PC decide to
> crash and doesn't let me log in. I am working from a backup PC on which I
> don't have the last version of the ontology. SHould be fine by tomorrow ;-)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jean-Pierre
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> De : Mari Carmen Suárez de Figueroa Baonza [mcsuarez@fi.upm.es]
> Date d'envoi : jeudi, 2. décembre 2010 17:17
> À : Evain, Jean-Pierre
> Cc : Pierre-Antoine Champin; public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Objet : Re: Next iteration of the RDF ontology
>
> Dear Jean-Pierre and all,
>
>    I took a look to the ontology you sent on 15th November, and I have
> a pair of comments (maybe you have already discussed about them, sorry
> if this is the case).
>
> - With respect to the Track class and its subclasses (AudioTrack,
> Captioning, VideoTrack), I would suggest to complete the comments for
> the subclasses, because as it is know is difficult to understand the
> meaning of them (for a newcomer). In this context I have a pair of
> doubts: is it AudioTrack the same as Segment? is it VideoTrack the same
> as Frame? is it Captioning the same as Subtitle? If so, could you
> consider to include these labels as synonyms of the existing classes?
>
> - In the case of the relation called "isFragmentOf" (domain:
> MediaFragment; range: MediaResource), I was wondering if it would not be
> better to extend/modified the current modelling in order to avoid
> possible inconsistences (such as "an image having as a fragment a video
> track and an audio track").
>
> Thank you very much in advance. Best Regards,
>
>       Mari Carmen.
>
> Evain, Jean-Pierre escribió:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Following the changes made during TPAC, we have been working with
> Pierre-Antoine and Tobias to improve the ontology and the mapping to the
> abstract ontology.
> >
> > The result of this work is attached. We will suggest a few changes to the
> abstract ontology to improve the logic of the semantic (date property
> structure) and also to improve interoperability with the MFWG specification
> (improving the mediaFragment structure).
> >
> > You will also notice that we are now more systematic in our approach
> illustrated by the removal of the contributor class hierarchy (which was
> there to mimic the abstract structure and help adoption) now implemented
> through properties.
> >
> > Pierre Antoine will review the mapping table and we'll update the RDF
> according to the decisions we make tomorrow.
> >
> > Cheers, JP (also on behalf on Tobias and Pierre-Antoine)
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------
> > **************************************************
> > This email and any files transmitted with it
> > are confidential and intended solely for the
> > use of the individual or entity to whom they
> > are addressed.
> > If you have received this email in error,
> > please notify the system manager.
> > This footnote also confirms that this email
> > message has been swept by the mailgateway
> > **************************************************
> >
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------
>  Dr. Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa
>  Teaching Assistant
>
>  Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
>
>  Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
>  Facultad de Informática
>  Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
>  Campus de Montegancedo, s/n
>  Boadilla del Monte - 28660 Madrid
>
>  Phone: (+34) 91 336 36 72
>  Fax: (+34) 91 352 48 19
>  e-mail: mcsuarez@fi.upm.es
>  Office: 3205
> ----------------------------------------------
>



-- 
___________________________________
Dr. Tobias Bürger
http://www.tobiasbuerger.com