- From: Veronique Malaise <vmalaise@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:05:22 +0200
- To: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
- Cc: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@bbc.co.uk>, Media Annotation <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Hi Yves, Raphaël, Yves: how would you see/write an annotation with an event model? Do you mean replacing/doubling the ma:relation property by x:hasEvent, x:hasTime, x:hasPlace etc? How could we deal with descriptions involving multiple places, times and events if we do not integrate them in a generic "Event" container, that would bring us back to the first issue: how to link a complete graph as an object for a property... Best, Véronique On Sep 14, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Raphaël Troncy wrote: >> I am not sure I understand, indeed - what is the status of that the >> examples you mentioned above, then? > > It has no status at all. Forget about this example. Its only purpose > is to illustrate an issue. > >> Is that something that is likely >> to make it in the final document? > > Absolutely not. The current situation is that "complex" annotations > in the sense I have explained are not possible so there is no reason > to have such an example. > >> If you want to tackle the "complex >> media annotation" scenario, and want to stick to your ma:relation >> framework, then you will have to use Named Graphs in the way you >> described it above, which we are apparently both concerned about? > > We come back to the original purpose of my email when I made up this > example. Intuitively, I could only think of this "named graph" > solution to fulfill this use case but I asked the SW Coordination > Group if there were other ways the WG could not think about since > the "named graph" does not bring satisfaction. > >> Pointing to a SKOS concept doesn't cause any issues, but pointing >> to a >> Named Graphs relies on some semantics that isn't quite there yet. > > Yes, we know that. > >> Therefore, I am guessing there are only two possible outcomes 1) >> Dropping the "complex" annotations from the scope of the final >> document or 2) Move to another scheme than the ma:relation one for >> complex annotations, which was what I pointed at in my previous >> email? > > The purpose of writing an email to the SW CG was exactly to ask for > help if there is not a 3rd way I cannot think about yet. > I think the minutes of the last F2F meeting of the WG summarize well > all this discussion. > Best regards. > > Raphaël > > -- > Raphaël Troncy > EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department > 2229, route des Crêtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France. > e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com > Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242 > Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200 > Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/ > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 12:06:52 UTC