Re: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues / additional issues

Martin,

I would like to focus first on the DC and Youtube formats as these are 
the 2 formats we use for the implementation report.

But indeed we should fix the other formats and have the JSON responses 
in Synch.

I am not sure I understand all the issue raised.

See my responses in line ...


Thierry


Le 11/06/2012 14:27, Höffernig, Martin a écrit :
> Dear Thierry, all,
>
> here is an incomplete list of issues regarding category 3:
>
> EBUCore:
> Location - 2 location data sets in JSON response, only 1 location present in ontology

Not sure what the issue is. Both seem to have 2 occurences:
the EBUCore XML
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EBUCoreXML_ITM528229_extended.xml
...
<coverage><spatial><location 
typeLink="cptype:city"><name>CARACAS</name></location><location 
typeLink="cptype:country"><name>VENEZUELA</name><code>country:VE</code></location></spatial></coverage>
...
and the JSON
...
{ "Location" : {
     "propertyName" : "location",
     "value" : "CARACAS",
     "language" : "English",
     "sourceFormat" : "ebucore",
     "mappingType" : "exact",
     "locationLabel" : "CARACAS",
     "longitude" : 0,
     "latitude" : 0,
     "altitude" : 0,
     "statusCode" : 200
     }
   },
   { "Location" : {
     "propertyName" : "location",
     "value" : "VENEZUELA",
     "language" : "English",
     "sourceFormat" : "ebucore",
     "mappingType" : "exact",
     "locationLabel" : "VENEZUELA",
     "longitude" : 0,
     "latitude" : 0,
     "altitude" : 0,
     "statusCode" : 200
     }
   },
...


> NamedFragment - NamedFragements in JSON, however no ma:hasNamedFragment relations in ontology

the EBUCore XML
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EBUCoreXML_ITM528229_extended.xml

in the Ontlogy exact mapping from
namedFragment 	to	hasPart






> Locator - property has been mixed up with Location, contains the same data
>
> Exif:
> FrameSize -  JSON contains 2 FrameSize data sets for same media resource, one FrameSize should refer to related thumbnail image

Right the second relates to the thumbnail.


>
> ID3:
> Contributor - roleLabels for Contributor (e.g. "TCOM Composer") not present in ontology
>
> LOM 2.1:
> FrameSize - present in JSON, no data available in ontology
> Duration - same issue


Not sure what the issue is:

ma:frameSize 	more general mapping to	"size"

lom example:
...
<technical><size>1000</size>
...

lom Json:

   { "FrameSize" : {
     "propertyName" : "frameSize",
     "value" : "1000",
     "language" : "English",
     "sourceFormat" : "lom21",
     "mappingType" : "more general",
     "width" : 0,
     "height" : 0,
     "statusCode" : 200
     }
   },


ma:duration  is exact mapping to duration

there seems to be a bug here in the Lom example: the duration is in a 
comment:
...
<!--duration><duration>1H</duration>
   </duration-->
...

Lom Json:

The duration value set to zero seems wrong (should be one hour)

  { "Duration" : {
     "propertyName" : "duration",
     "language" : "English",
     "sourceFormat" : "lom21",
     "fragmentIdentifier" : "exact",
     "duration" : 0,
     "statusCode" : 204
     }
   },

>
> Media RSS:
> Copyright - holderLink present in JSON, no information available in ontology

Not sure what the issue is:

ma:copyright 	exact mapping to 
"rss/channel/item/media:content/media:copyright"


MediaRSS example:
...
<media:copyright url="http://blah.com/additional-info.html">2005 FooBar 
Media</media:copyright>
...

MediaRSS Json:
...
   { "Copyright" : {
     "propertyName" : "copyright",
     "value" : "2005 FooBar Media",
     "language" : "en",
     "sourceFormat" : "mrss",
     "mappingType" : "exact",
     "copyrightLabel" : "2005 FooBar Media",
     "holderLink" : "http://blah.com/additional-info.html",
     "statusCode" : 200
     }
...
>
> TV-Anytime:
> TargetAudience - multiple targetAudience result sets present in JSON, only 1 target audience in ontology

Not sure what the issue is:

ma:targetAudience 	related mapping to "Genre"

TVA  example:

...
<Genre href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.1"><Name>Daily 
news</Name></Genre><Genre 
href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.13"><Name>Weather 
forecasts</Name></Genre><Genre 
href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:FormatCS:2005:2.1.1"><Name>Bulletin</Name></Genre><Genre 
href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:IntentionCS:2005:1.2"><Name>INFORM</Name></Genre><Genre 
href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.9"><Name>Sports</Name></Genre>
...

TVA  Json:
...
{ "TargetAudience" : {
     "propertyName" : "targetAudience",
     "value" : "Weather forecasts",
     "language" : "EN-UK",
     "sourceFormat" : "tva",
     "mappingType" : "related",
     "audienceLink" : "urn:tva:metadata:cs:ContentCS:2005:3.1.1.13",
     "audienceLabel" : "Weather forecasts",
     "statusCode" : 200
     }
   },
   { "TargetAudience" : {
     "propertyName" : "targetAudience",
     "value" : "Bulletin",
     "language" : "EN-UK",
     "sourceFormat" : "tva",
     "mappingType" : "related",
     "audienceLink" : "urn:tva:metadata:cs:FormatCS:2005:2.1.1",
     "audienceLabel" : "Bulletin",
     "statusCode" : 200
     }

...


>
> Since my list is incomplete, more sync issues are potentially possible. Therefore I suggest to fully revise the JSON files and update these files w.r.t the unchanged ontology files.
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
>> Gesendet: Montag, 11. Juni 2012 12:21
>> An: tmichel@w3.org
>> Cc: Höffernig, Martin; public-media-annotation@w3.org; Bailer, Werner
>> Betreff: Re: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues /
>> additional issues
>>
>>
>> Remains now the third category that we may want to naildown before
>> going to PR
>>
>>   >  I made the observation
>>   >  that some JSON response documents are not in sync with the>
>> corresponding ontology examples.
>>   >
>>   >  Therefore, MediaAnnotation objects include data which are not>
>> present in the corresponding ontology document.
>>   >
>>   >  I thought that the ontology documents should be the basis for the
>> JSON>  responses?
>>   >
>>   >  Concerning formats:
>>   >
>>   >  EBUCore, Exif, ID3, LOM, MediaRSS, TV-Anytime
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Could you precise which data are out of sync ?
>>
>> How should we resolve it:
>> Should we update the output (the JSON Files) or the input (example and
>> the RDF files in the Ontology testsuite?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> thierry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 11/06/2012 11:55, Thierry MICHEL a écrit :
>>> Martin,
>>>
>>>
>>> With the previous publication of your updated JSON files, I have also
>>> updated these with the proper status code 200, as requested bellow.
>>>
>>>
>>> This should now close the issue for the category 1 and 2.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> thierry.
>>>
>>> Le 05/06/2012 12:52, Höffernig, Martin a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> I have reviewed the API status codes [1] in the normative JSON files
>>>> of the testsuite implementation [2] and I found some issues that
>>>> should be addressed.
>>>> All of these issues are related to the usage of status code 206
>>>> (partial content).
>>>> For me, 206 is misused in many cases since its semantics is possibly
>>>> not quite clear.
>>>>
>>>> I think, 206 should be returned in cases where only partial data of
>>>> available data for a media resource is returned.
>>>> For example, when requesting the FrameSize property and Height will
>>>> be returned only, while data about Width is available as well should
>>>> result in status code 206.
>>>> On the other side, when retrieving a location property for which the
>>>> name of the location (locationLabel) is available only - further
>>>> information like latitude and longitude is not available - I suggest
>>>> to return status code 200 (OK), since all the available information
>>>> will be returned.
>>>>
>>>> Taken my interpretation of the usage of satus code 206 into account,
>>>> I suggest to change the status code 206 to 200 in for the following
>>>> MediaAnnotation objects:
>>>> DIG35:
>>>> Location, Copyright
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> DublinCore:
>>>> Contributor, MADate, Location, Relation, Copyright
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> EBUCore:
>>>> Locator, Location, Creator, Relation, TargetAudience,
>> NamendFragment,
>>>> Fragment, FrameSize
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> Exif:
>>>> Copyright, FrameSize
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> ID3:
>>>> Contributor
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> YouTube:
>>>> TargetAudience
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> IPTC:
>>>> Location, Copyright, Policy, TargetAudience, Fragment, FrameSize
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> LOM 2.1:
>>>> FrameSize
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> Media RSS:
>>>> Location, Rating, Copyright, Policy, FrameSize
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> TV-Anytime:
>>>> Relation, TargetAudience
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>
>>>> TXFeed:
>>>> Copyright
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> XMP:
>>>> Contributor, Creator, MADate, Location, Rating, Relation, Copyright,
>>>> Policy
>>> Done.
>>>
>>>> YouTube:
>>>> TargetAudience
>>>
>>> already Done from above.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, I suggest that in a JSON response, MediaAnnotation
>>>> objects should only contain attributes with associated values.
>>>> For example, in the following MediaAnnotation object, the attributes
>>>> language, fragmentIdentifer, typeLink, and typeLabel should be
>>>> removed, since no value is available for these attributes.
>>>> { "Title" : {
>>>> "propertyName" : "title",
>>>> "value" : "Oasis Concert Stage @ I Am A Walrus", "language" : "",
>>>> "sourceFormat" : "dig35", "fragmentIdentifier" : "", "mappingType" :
>>>> "exact", "titleLabel" : "Oasis Concert Stage @ I Am A Walrus",
>>>> "typeLink" : "", "typeLabel" : "", "statusCode" : 200 }
>>>>
>>>> This issue applies to many MediaAnnotation objects in following
>>>> documents:
>>>> DIG35, Dublin Core, EBUCore, Exif, ID3, IPTC, LOM, MediaRSS, DMS-1,
>>>> TV-Anytime, TXFeed, XMP, YouTube
>>>>
>>>> Moreover, while examining the status codes, I made the observation
>>>> that some JSON response documents are not in sync with the
>>>> corresponding ontology examples.
>>>> Therefore, MediaAnnotation objects include data which are not
>> present
>>>> in the corresponding ontology document.
>>>> I thought that the ontology documents should be the basis for the
>>>> JSON responses?
>>>> Concerning formats:
>>>> EBUCore, Exif, ID3, LOM, MediaRSS, TV-Anytime
>>>>
>>>> [1]:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20111122/#api-status-
>> co
>>>> des
>>>> [2]:
>>>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/TestSuite_implementa
>>>> tion
>>>>
>>>> Hope my observation scan help to improve the JSON documents.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Martin
>>>> --
>>>> Martin Höffernig
>>>> Audiovisual Media Group
>>>> DIGITAL - Institute for Information and Communication Technologies
>>>>
>>>> JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Steyrergasse 17, 8010
>>>> Graz, AUSTRIA
>>>>
>>>> phone: +43-316-876-1184
>>>> general fax: +43-316-876-1191
>>>> web: http://www.joanneum.at/digital
>>>> e-mail:
>>>> martin.hoeffernig@joanneum.at<mailto:martin.hoeffernig@joanneum.at>
>>>>
>>>>

Received on Monday, 11 June 2012 14:04:38 UTC