RE: [AGENDA] Media Annotations WG Teleconf - 2010-11-30

Dear Joakim,

A remark about the time: According to [1] it's at 12:00 UTC, not 11:00 (which nonetheless is 13:00 CET in winter ...)

Best regards,
Werner

[1] http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar.html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
> annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Joakim Söderberg
> Sent: Sonntag, 28. November 2010 19:52
> To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Subject: [AGENDA] Media Annotations WG Teleconf - 2010-11-30
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> Here is the agenda for Tuesday:
> 
> -------------------------------
> 1. Convene
> Media Annotations WG
> Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 6294 ("MAWG")
> Alternative dial numbers:
> France (Nice): +33.4.26.46.79.03
> UK (Bristol) : +44.117.370.6152
> IRC channel: #mediaann
> Tuesday 2010-11-30 11:00-12:00 UTC, (ie, Amsterdam, Paris, Stockholm
> 13:00)
> Regrets:
> Chair: Joakim
> Scribe: TBA
> 
> Minutes to appear: http://www.w3.org/2010/11/30-mediaann-minutes.html
> Propose to accept F2F minutes: http://www.w3.org/2010/11/16-mediaann-
> minutes.html
> 
> 2. Next meeting
> Tuesday 2010-12-07
> 
> 3. Items
> [A] Action items:
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/open
> 
> [B] If we have a quorum, discuss the set of changes to the (abstract)
> Ontology, summarized here by Jean-Pierre:
> 
> - It is proposed to add track as a sub-class of fragment to help
> aligning with MFWG
> - It is proposed to add videoTrack and audioTrack to which currently
> existing specialised properties like frameRate or sampleRate will be
> more specifically linked as well as a better use of the compression
> property
> - It is proposed to add captioningTrack to better align with MFWG and
> also to address subtitling more properly
> 
> - It is proposed to change createDate (or creationDate) as "date" and
> list createDate (or creationDate) at the same level as releaseDate,
> etc.  This allows better hierarchical representation of dates in the
> RDF ontology as, for example, releaseDate cannot be considered as a
> subclass of createDate?
> 
> - RatingValue should be float but it should now have been corrected in
> the API following today review of actions.
> 
> - language and compression should allow string but also anyURI values,
> which would allow using SKOS concepts from classification schemes
> 
> [C] Follow up on Implementation of LC comments
> 
> 1- Media Ontology spec
> 
> -- LC Comment -2393 : NOT reviewed
> -- LC Comment -2405:  JP Evain:
> Introduction
> -          Note to implementers, content authors - not really explicit,
> maybe these roles should be mentioned saying things like "it is
> expected that implementers will do."  ". to the benefit of content
> providers", etc.
> 
> -          There is no section 1.1 on the purpose of the specification
> (yet)
> 
> Section 4.1 core property definitions -> now section 5.1
> -          The ma: prefix still appears in the table but since the
> comment was made Pierre Antoine, while working on the mapping table
> suggested that the prefix should only be used with the ma-ont namespace
> in the RDF -> reconsider position?
> 
> Section 4.2.2 - no change as explained in previous response - tables in
> line -> now 5.2.2
> 
> Joakim: "our specification" is replaced by "this specification" (OK),
> But "our Ontology" (two occurrences in section 1)
> 
> Other comments from JP review
> 
> The abstract and introduction should mention the definition of the RDF
> ontology and the mapping table that will come with it.
> 
> 
> -- LC Comment -2389 : NO - partially implemented
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0086.html
> 
> -- LC Comment -2404 : NO - partially implemented
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0093.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0085.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0094.html
> 
> 
> -- LC Comment -2418: NO - partially implemented (Edits are missing)
> see edits at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0073.html
> 
> ____________
> 
> 2- Media API spec
> 
> -- LC Comment -2395 : NOT reviewed
> -- LC Comment -2406 : NOT reviewed
> 
> -- LC Comment -2419 : NO partially implemented
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0090.html
> 
> -- LC Comment -2410 : OK But Chris must add Véronique's edits see edits
> at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0107.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0106.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [D] reminder : Metadata examples needed!
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-
> annotation/2010Nov/0081.html
> 
> During the F2F in Lyon, we decided to verify our mapping ontology by
> having metadata in each format
> AOB
> 
> 
> Best Regards
> /Joakim
> 
>

Received on Monday, 29 November 2010 08:03:38 UTC