- From: Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>
- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 14:58:03 +0100
- To: 'Chris Poppe' <Chris.poppe@elis.ugent.be>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Dear Chris, We actually have implemented this using subproperties to hasFragment linking a MediaFragment to a MediaResource. This encompasses two aspects of your comment: namedFragment but also any additional role. The Fragment already has a fragmentName in the RDF. Regards, Jean-Pierre -----Original Message----- From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Chris Poppe Sent: mardi, 16. novembre 2010 14:46 To: public-media-annotation@w3.org Subject: [mawg]Fragments and NamedFragments Dear all, In my quest to simplify the API document I was looking at the fragments and namedFragments property. Wouldn't it be easier to just use one property "fragments" with an id, an optional "role", and an optional "name"? The same holds for the ontology document of course. Kind regards, Chris Ghent University - IBBT Faculty of Engineering Department of Electronics and Information Systems (ELIS) Multimedia Lab Gaston Crommenlaan 8 bus 201 B-9050 Ledeberg-Ghent Belgium t: +32 9 33 14959 f: +32 9 33 14896 t secr: +32 9 33 14911 e: chris.poppe@ugent.be URL: http://multimedialab.elis.ugent.be
Received on Tuesday, 16 November 2010 13:58:45 UTC