- From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 10:24:17 +0200
- To: tmichel@w3.org
- CC: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>, Florian Stegmaier <stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de>
The CR version of the Ontology is now at http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/ontology10/CR/mediaont-1.0.html Please review. TM. Le 07/05/2011 09:55, Thierry MICHEL a écrit : > > Pierre Antoine, Florian, > > I have updated the Ontology spec with your edits following. > Florian can you please update the API spec ? > > > > > > Change to section 4.4: Double > > Change title from "Double" to "Decimal" > --> Done > > A Decimal value SHOULD be represented using the XML Schema decimal data > type, but MAY be represented using the XML Schema double data type if > decimal is not available. > > --> Done > > Other changes related to Double/Decimal > > All occurence of "double" or "Double" up to section 5.1 (included) can > be replaced by "decimal" or "Decimal" respectively. All furhter > occurences should be kept as is (they refer to the IEEE double dataype). > > --> Done > > > > Change to section 4.5: Date > > A Date value MUST be represented using one of the specific date/time > data types of XML Schema, depending on the available precision: gYear > gYearMonth, date, dateTime, or dateTimeStamp. > Change to 7.2 Correspondence between the informal ontology and the RDF > representation > > --> Done > > (...) > date.date (value of ma:date) (6) > > --> Done > > #correspondance-id6 > > (6) According to Section 4.4, several datatypes are allowed here. > However, if compliance with a specific OWL 2 Profile is required, > additional constraints on the allowed datatypes may apply [OWL2 Profiles]. > > --> Done > Addition to Appendix B References (Non-Normative) > > #owl2-profiles > > [OWL2 Profiles] > OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Profiles. W3C OWL Working Group. Available > for download at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/ . > > --> Done > > I have also included you new owl version "R32d" > from 2011-04-06 > > Finally I have added a new section with the Ontology in TTL > > Let me know if all these changes are OK. > > > > Le 04/05/2011 17:51, Pierre-Antoine Champin a écrit : >> Hi all, >> >> as per my ACTION-412, here attached is a list of changes in the ontology >> and API documents implementating my two proposals: >> >> 1/ >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2011Apr/0026.html >> >> >> Basically I replaced "must use dateTime" by "must use one of gYear, >> gYearMonth, date, dateTime, dateTimeStamp" (in both the Ontology and API >> document) with a warning in the RDF section about OWL2 compliance. >> >> >> 2/ >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2011Apr/0034.html >> >> >> That one didn't receive any feedback, so I'm assuming nobody is against >> it :) Basically, I replaced "must use double" by "should use decimal, >> but may use double", which lets the API use 'double' (as WebIDL does not >> have decimal) but lets RDF use the more general 'decimal' datatype for >> the sake of OWL2 profile compliance. >> >> >> Also, I attach a new version of the RDF ontology with >> * some bugs removed >> * those changes implemented >> * a cleaner look >> and a Turtle version of that ontology. >> >> I would suggest that both files would be *linked* from the Ontology >> document (Turtle being marked as non-normative) rather than the ugly >> verbatim inclusion of the RDF/XML... >> >> regards >> >> pa >
Received on Saturday, 7 May 2011 08:24:37 UTC