W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > February 2011

Re: AW: ACTION ALL to review the Ontology spec before 2nd Last CAll

From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:20:55 +0100
Message-ID: <4D515147.2090609@w3.org>
To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>

Thank you for your review and the TTML mappings.
See updates in comments bellow.

Le 03/02/2011 18:16, Bailer, Werner a écrit :
> Dear Thierry, all,
> here is my review:
> abstract:
> - "in local archives or museums": While archives could be understand in a broader sense, museum sounds very specific here. What about "local repositories" ?

You want to replace "local archives or museums" by "local repositories" ?

> introduction:
> - missing reference "Dublin Core set REF"
> - "all of needs of" ->  "all needs of" ?
> - "(see Use Cases and Requirements for Ontology and API for Media Object 1.0)": "Media Object" ->  "Media Resource"

> - Multimedia container formats in scope: the example column says ??? for all
> terminology:
> - missing reference "its machine-readable format is specified in the annex REF"
> - missing reference "properties listed in the following section REF"
> across the document:
> - most references are in italics, but some are not, e.g. RFC2119 in sec. 2, BBC in sec. 3, EBU vocabulary in sec. 5, SKOS in sec. 5, first MediaFragment ref in sec 6.2

Right. This is because some links reference were not done properlly. If 
I find the time I will harmonize else it will be done for CR.

> property definitions:
> - section 5.1.3 still says: @@TODO: add more examples for all properties defined in the above table

> - missing reference in 5.1.2: "proposed Use Cases REF"
> - 5.2.1: +1 for removing the last sentence
> - "A future version of this specification..." : in the first line, it seems mappings is meant instead of properties (mentioned 2 times) - otherwise I do not understand the meaning (how could a property be symmetric?)

> mapping tables:
> - Dublin core: language and publisher have no data type

DONE + format and collection ....

> - When DFXP was in final call, we did a mapping of the few metadata elements. I think we talked about that, but somehow lost track of it: should we add a small mapping table for TTML? If we want to include it, I can provide such a table quickly.
> Acknowlegdments
> - member list needs update, e.g. missing "A" in Courtney Kennedy's affiliation, Vassilis Tzouvaras has affiliation K-Space (project ended, consortium is thus no longer K-Space member), Jean-Pierre is listed as invited expert (although EBU is now member), different version of company name for Martin Höffernig and myself


> Best regards,
> Werner
> ________________________________________
> Von: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] im Auftrag von Thierry MICHEL [tmichel@w3.org]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 03. Februar 2011 09:55
> An: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Betreff: ACTION ALL to review the Ontology spec before 2nd  Last CAll
> Hi all,
> Please review carefully the Ontology draft
> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont-1.0.html
> This will be the *last chance* for edits before going to 2nd  Last Call.
> During the next MAWG telecon, the group will take the decision to move
> to 2nd  Last Call.
> Please report to the mailing list your feedback.
> Thierry.
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 14:21:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:24:45 UTC