- From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:44:11 +0100
- To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
- CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
OK, done. Le 08/02/2011 15:25, Bailer, Werner a écrit : > Hi Thierry, > > Thanks a lot. > >>> 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" >> ? > > Yes, I think museum is really very specific here, given that the word does not appear any more in the document. Maybe you can think of a more appropriate word than repository? > > Best regards, > Werner > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org] >> Sent: Dienstag, 08. Februar 2011 15:21 >> To: Bailer, Werner >> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org >> Subject: Re: AW: ACTION ALL to review the Ontology spec before 2nd Last >> CAll >> >> Werner, >> >> >> Thank you for your review and the TTML mappings. >> See updates in comments bellow. >> http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-1.0/mediaont- >> 1.0.html#d0e10041 >> >> >> 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" >> DONE >>> - "all of needs of" -> "all needs of" ? >> DONE >>> - "(see Use Cases and Requirements for Ontology and API for Media >> Object 1.0)": "Media Object" -> "Media Resource" >> DONE >> >>> - Multimedia container formats in scope: the example column says ??? >> for all >> DONE >>> >>> terminology: >>> - missing reference "its machine-readable format is specified in the >> annex REF" >> DONE >>> - missing reference "properties listed in the following section REF" >> DONE >>> >>> 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 >> REMOVED >> >> >> >>> - missing reference in 5.1.2: "proposed Use Cases REF" >> DONE >>> - 5.2.1: +1 for removing the last sentence >> REMOVED >>> - 5.2.1.3 "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?) >> >> DONE >>> 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. >> DONE >>> >>> 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 >> >> >> UPDATED >> >> >>> 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 14:44:38 UTC