Re: RE : Minutes of the MAWG telecon july 18th 2011 and ACTION for editors.

Thank you for your mail, Thierry. If that's OK with you and the group please
extend the deadline until the end of August. And I hope that Siliva can
start with what's here as a documentation and will get help from the group
later.

Best,

Felix

2011/7/26 Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>

> Felix,
>
> I agree that the deadline Aug 7th is not the greatest, regarding the
> summer holiday. (but remember that these files were requested more than 5
> months ago). Now why Aug 7th ? Just to match the specification SoTD:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-mediaont-10-20110707/
>
> "This specification will remain a Candidate Recommendation until at least
> 01 August 2011 and until the API for Media Resource 1.0 specification
> enters Candidate Recommendation."
>
> And the API for Media Resource 1.0 specification LC review ends  07 August
> 2011.
> see:
>    http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20110712
>
> The idea was to collect all files at that date. Then we will have to check
> again all the RDF files: We must make sure that not only the RDF files are
> valid (against the RDF validator) but also they validate against the Media
> Ontology (for this we use Protégé). If anyone has a better idea idea, the
> Group will be happy to do otherwise. Thanks to Werner and Martin to
> provide this "how to use" guide to validate the RDF files with Protégé.
>
> We can not move to PR with RDF files in a testsuite that do not validate
> the Media Ontology scheme.
>
> I am fine with extending the deadline, but I would not want to delay
> eternally this spec. At some point if there are RDF files that do fulfill
> the guidelines, we will have to remove the corresponding mapping Format
> from the Ontology spec (according to the CR exit criteria).
>
> I personnally have no real RDF expertise. But I think the guidelines are
> very helpfull (thank for all the people who have given input here). And it
> has helped me a lot to do my format. Also looking at other correct file is
> a lot of help.
>
> There are a  few lines mandatory like the following to add to the file to
> allow validation. Also providing in parallel the HTML column of the
> "RDF-tested" column is affordable to everyone.
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <!-- created by hand by Thierry MICHEL (W3C) for Dublin Core example file
> : version 4 -->
> <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/ns/ma-ont#"
> xmlns:ma="http://www.w3.org/ns/ma-ont#"
> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
> xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
> xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"
> xmlns:more="........." >
> <owl:Ontology>
>    <owl:imports rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/ns/ma-ont"/>
> </owl:Ontology>
>
>
> Then one has to make sure the file validates against the Ontology using
> Protégé.
>
> This is the way to start with.
>
> Sylvia should start with this and if the file don't validate, I guess
> there will be people from the WG helping her to provide good RDF files.
>
> Best,
>
> Thierry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I assume that the difference between you and Silvia is that you have much
> > more experience in work with RDF. So even if you and Silvia are asked the
> > same thing, in practice it means much more work for her.
> >
> > Of course you are right about what Thierry is doing. But there are very
> > experienced RDF experts in this group. So maybe some of them wants to
> take
> > the effort and help Silvia?
> >
> > I understand that this approach of helping out the actual owner of a
> > format
> > does not scale. But in this specific case I see the value of building a
> > bridge between (the godmother of) HTML5 (video) and RDF.
> >
> > Another issue here is of course the deadline. Setting a deadline as 7
> > August, that is in the middle of the summer break, creates problems. So
> > maybe extending this to the end of August might help here too, like it
> > would
> > help me for XMP and and Flash. As said in a different thread, 7 August
> > will
> > not work for me anyway.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Felix
> >
> >
> > 2011/7/26 Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>
> >
> >> I was also obliged to add fields to my real data operational files to
> >> illustrate how the different formats I was responsible for would map to
> >> ma-ont. I also spent hours on this and I wasn't so happy about it but I
> >> complied.
> >>
> >> Of course I would never have expected from Thierry to have to get into
> >> all
> >> these details for each format and correct my mistakes.
> >>
> >> In contrary I'd to restrospectively warmly thank Thierry for providing
> >> me
> >> with the information I needed to complete this work, in addition to
> >> timely
> >> uploading the files (xml, rdf and html).
> >>
> >> I also would like to congratulate the group who made the review of each
> >> format and mapping during the last F2F.
> >>
> >> Jean-Pierre
> >> ________________________________________
> >> De : public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [
> >> public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] de la part de Thierry Michel [
> >> tmichel@w3.org]
> >> Date d'envoi : lundi, 25. juillet 2011 17:40
> >> À : Silvia Pfeiffer
> >> Cc : tmichel@w3.org; public-media-annotation@w3.org
> >> Objet : Re: Minutes of the MAWG telecon july 18th 2011 and ACTION for
> >> editors.
> >>
> >> > Dear Thierry,
> >> >
> >> > I am not an editor on this spec, just a willing contributor. I have
> >> > spent many hours preparing files for this WG such that there are files
> >> > for formats that this WG cares about or should care about. The last
> >> > time that I sent files through I was told that the files are fine. Now
> >> > I am told there is more work that I need to do with a link to a
> >> > randomly long list of things that I should take the files through. I
> >> > would prefer to be told exactly what is wrong with my files. Also, I
> >> > believe I have provided sufficient detail the last time around that
> >> > you as a W3C employee can just fix up whatever wrong RDF markup I
> >> > provided if it doesn't validate.
> >> >
> >> > As for any missing fields: I have in the past explained how in theory
> >> > Ogg and WebM files can contain all these fields, but that existing
> >> > software does not encode all of these fields at this point in time. I
> >> > have added what was possible to the binary files at this point. I can
> >> > make up RDF files that do not relate to the binary files, but that
> >> > will be very unhelpful. As the files are just an example for what is
> >> > possible at this point in time, I do not see a need to write new
> >> > software that will create files with all the fields that you are
> >> > asking for. I believe you will actually end up with the same situation
> >> > for all of the binary formats including FLV and MP4. I have explained
> >> > this in that past - indeed in many discussions and emails that we had
> >> > on this topic - but I just don't seem to be able to make this point
> >> > understood.
> >> >
> >>
> >> It is 100% understood, and we have taken resolution about it, but
> >> because
> >> you did not attend the MAWG F2F nor the telcons you may not be aware of
> >> the WG decision.
> >>
> >> Please read the CR exit critéria (these have been requested by the W3C
> >> Director, no me !).
> >>
> >> "
> >> Each format listed in the testsuite for Ontology for Media Resources 1.0
> >> has at least one example file covering a subset or all of the properties
> >> of the core vocabulary of the Media Ontology available for each format
> >> (e.g some formats may not have a mapping to all the properties core set;
> >> for example the "MP4" format does not have a property mapping to the
> >> "identifier" property of the core vocabulary of the Media Ontology). For
> >> formats providing an exemple using only a subset of the properties of
> >> the
> >> core vocabulary, the missing properties will be highlighted in the
> >> corresponding mapping tables
> >> "
> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-mediaont-10-20110707/
> >>
> >> > Once your "help" is more concrete than sending me a hyperlink to an
> >> > email with 4 further hyperlinks, two semi-understandable meeting
> >> > minutes, a guideline for editing with a request to install 4 pieces of
> >> > software (which in my case for binary files isn't even sufficient),
> >> > and a random call to "just fix your files", feel free to get back to
> >> > me with concrete questions for what you still need for these files.
> >>
> >> I have pointed to an older email that you seemed to be unaware of.
> >> Do I need to copy the minutes in my email. Isn't an hyperlink good
> >> enough?
> >>
> >> We (the MAWG) have reviewed the RDF files during the F2F. We have
> >> concluded that some RDF files are not good, some are missing info, etc.
> >> Therefore we have written guidelines in order to help the editors. Files
> >> must fulfill the guidelines.
> >> If there are pieces that you don't understand in these guidelines, the
> >> MAWG will be happy to clarifying what is unclear. Maybe you could join a
> >> telecon if you have any issues.
> >> I am only coordinating the work here. If you may also ask more details
> >> to
> >> our co chairs.d
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Thierry
> >>
> >>
> >> > Best Regards,
> >> > Silvia Pfeiffer.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> Sylvia,
> >> >>
> >> >> We had many discussions and emails on this topic.
> >> >>
> >> >> Please refer to the F2F minutes for review of your formats OGG and
> >> WebM
> >> >> and
> >> >> also to the guidelines to edit conformant RDF files.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2011Jul/0023.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Best,
> >> >>
> >> >> Thierry.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Le 22/07/2011 12:35, Silvia Pfeiffer a écrit :
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Dear Thierry,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> What is missing now in the files? Are you able to fix it without my
> >> >>> help?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Silvia.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Thierry MICHEL<tmichel@w3.org>
> >>  wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Colleagues,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> During this telecon there was very poor attendance.
> >> >>>> Only Werner, Mari-Carmen and I were present.
> >> >>>> Unfortunately, we were missing a quorum and only a couple of
> >> regrets
> >> >>>> sent.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> We have discussed the RDF files in the Testsuite and the guidelines
> >> to
> >> >>>> provide conformant RDF files.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> So far we have 7 formats conformant (RDF files marked in green)
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> We are missing the following compliant RDF files and updated HTML
> >> >>>> mapping
> >> >>>> table:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Joakim:
> >> >>>> - Cablelabs
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Wonsuk
> >> >>>> -MRSS
> >> >>>> -TXF
> >> >>>> -You tube
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Sylvia
> >> >>>> -OGG
> >> >>>> -WebM
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Courtney/Mari Carment
> >> >>>> - 3GPP
> >> >>>> - Quicktime
> >> >>>> -
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Felix
> >> >>>> - Flash
> >> >>>> - XMP
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Tobias
> >> >>>> - EXIF
> >> >>>> - LOM
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Pierre Antoine
> >> >>>> -ID3
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Chris:
> >> >>>> - Dig35
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Next week the telecon (July 25th) will be canceled.
> >> >>>> ACTION: editors please work on these files. We are about to be done
> >> >>>> now
> >> >>>> to
> >> >>>> move to REC, once we have fulfilled these files.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Deadline is Aug 4th.
> >> >>>> Best,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Thierry
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thierry Michel
> >> W3C
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> Thierry Michel
> W3C
>



-- 
Prof. Dr. Felix Sasaki
Senior Researcher / Professor at University of Applied Sciences Potsdam
DFKI GmbH, Alt-Moabit 91c, 10559 Berlin, Germany http://www.dfki.de
phone: +49-30-23895-1807 (fax: -1810)
------------------------------------------------
Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz GmbH
Firmensitz: Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster
(Vorsitzender), Dr. Walter Olthoff
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313

Register for the W3C MultilingualWeb Workshop!
Limerick, 21-22 September 2011
http://multilingualweb.eu/**register <http://multilingualweb.eu/register>