- From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:11:50 +0200
- To: "Höffernig, Martin" <Martin.Hoeffernig@joanneum.at>
- CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Martin, Note that I have changed a typo in your JSON files for DC and YT. in both files, I have chaged: "typeLabel": "creation date" to "typeLabel": "creation date", And thanks again for your valuable input. Best, thierry Le 20/06/2012 12:02, Thierry MICHEL a écrit : > Martin, > > > Thanks for the files, > > see my publications as indicated in line > > best, > > thierry > > Le 19/06/2012 14:36, Höffernig, Martin a écrit : >> Dear Thierry, all >> >> Please find enclosed the updated JSON and RDF files for DC and YT. >> >> >> DC (changes have been made in JSON as well as RDF): >> MADate: >> added "typeLabel": "creation date" in JSON. > > > JSON file published at > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/JSON/normative_json_ma_dc.json > > > and I also updated the JSON atomic files > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/da-date_ma_dc.json > > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/Db-date_ma_dc.json > > >> >> Keyword: >> added language information (xml:lang="en") in RDF. >> >> Copyright: >> changed RDF property for copyright description from ma:isCopyrightedBy >> to ma:copyright. > > > RDF file published at > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/DC_example1.rdf > > >> >> YT (changes made in JSON only): >> MADate: >> added "typeLabel": "creation date" in JSON. >> >> Keyword: >> fixed keyword results in JSON according to RDF data. >> >> Rating: >> added ratingSystemLabel attribute for Rating in JSON. > > > > JSON file published at > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/JSON/normative_json_ma_yt_oi.json > > > > and I also updated the JSON atomic files > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-date_ma_YT.json > > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-date_ma_YT.json > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/yb-date_ma_YT.json > > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-keyword_ma_YT.json > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/yb-keyword_ma_YT.json > > > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/ya-rating_ma_YT.json > > http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API/json-responses/yb-rating_ma_YT.json > > > > > > >> >> >> Best, >> Martin >> >> >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: Höffernig, Martin [mailto:Martin.Hoeffernig@joanneum.at] >>> Gesendet: Montag, 18. Juni 2012 15:58 >>> An: tmichel@w3.org; public-media-annotation@w3.org >>> Betreff: AW: AW: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues / >>> additional issues >>> >>> Dear Thierry, all, >>> >>> as announced in my last email, here are my comments regarding the JSON >>> youtube result set: >>> >>> MADate: >>> JSON: >>> { "MADate" : { >>> "propertyName" : "date", >>> "value" : "2010-01-26T10:00:00Z", >>> "sourceFormat" : "yt", >>> "mappingType" : "exact", >>> "date" : "2010-01-26T10:00:00Z", >>> "statusCode" : 200 >>> } >>> >>> RDF: >>> <ma:creationDate >>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime"> >>> 2010-01-26T10:00:00Z >>> </ma:creationDate> >>> >>> Optional typeLabel attribute "creation date" missing JSON, although >>> related information available in RDF. >>> >>> Location: >>> JSON: >>> { "Location" : { >>> "propertyName" : "location", >>> "value" : "35.669998 139.770004", >>> "sourceFormat" : "yt", >>> "mappingType" : "exact", >>> "longitude" : 35.669998, >>> "latitude" : 139.770004, >>> "altitude" : 0, >>> "statusCode" : 200 >>> } >>> >>> RDF: >>> <ma:Location> >>> <ma:locationLongitude >>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal"> >>> 35.669998 >>> </ma:locationLongitude> >>> <ma:locationLatitude >>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal"> >>> 139.770004 >>> </ma:locationLatitude> >>> </ma:Location> >>> >>> No altitude data available in RDF, however altitude in JSON is set to >>> zero. >>> >>> Keyword: >>> JSON: >>> >>> { "Keyword" : { >>> "propertyName" : "keyword", >>> "value" : "SM ENTERTAINMENT Oh!", >>> "sourceFormat" : "yt", >>> "mappingType" : "exact", >>> "keywordLabel" : "SM ENTERTAINMENT Oh!", >>> "statusCode" : 200 >>> } >>> }, >>> >>> RDF: >>> <ma:hasKeyword rdf:parseType="Resource"> >>> <rdfs:label> >>> SM ENTERTAINMENT >>> </rdfs:label> >>> </ma:hasKeyword> >>> >>> <ma:hasKeyword rdf:parseType="Resource"> >>> <rdfs:label> >>> Oh! >>> </rdfs:label> >>> </ma:hasKeyword> >>> >>> JSON Keyword "SM ENTERTAINMENT Oh!" is concation of 2 different >>> keywords in RDF. >>> Seems to be a minor issue regarding the implementation report, since >>> the JSON result sets for 3 remaining keywords have been returned >>> correctly. >>> >>> >>> Rating: >>> JSON: >>> { "Rating" : { >>> "propertyName" : "rating", >>> "value" : "4.6510544", >>> "sourceFormat" : "yt", >>> "ratingValue" : 4.6510544, >>> "minimum" : 1, >>> "maximum" : 5, >>> "statusCode" : 200 >>> } >>> }, >>> >>> <ma:hasRatingSystem rdf:parseType="Resource"> >>> <rdfs:label> >>> higherBetter >>> </rdfs:label> >>> </ma:hasRatingSystem> >>> >>> Optional attribute ratingSystemLabel is not present in JSON result set, >>> required data would be available in RDF. >>> >>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>>> Von: Höffernig, Martin [mailto:Martin.Hoeffernig@joanneum.at] >>>> Gesendet: Freitag, 15. Juni 2012 13:36 >>>> An: tmichel@w3.org; public-media-annotation@w3.org >>>> Betreff: AW: AW: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code issues >>> / >>>> additional issues >>>> >>>> Dear Thierry, all, >>>> >>>> here are my comments regarding the DC JSON result document: >>>> >>>> MADate: >>>> JSON: >>>> { "MADate" : { >>>> "propertyName" : "date", >>>> "value" : "2007-01-06T00:00:00.00", >>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc", >>>> "mappingType" : "related", >>>> "date" : "2007-01-06T00:00:00.00", >>>> "statusCode" : 200 >>>> } >>>> >>>> RDF: >>>> <ma:creationDate >>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime"> >>>> 2007-01-06T00:00:00.00 >>>> </ma:creationDate> >>>> >>>> Since this MADate result set refers to a creation date >>>> (ma:creationDate), typeLabel can be used to carry this information in >>>> addition to the current result set: >>>> "typeLabel": "creation date" >>>> >>>> Location: >>>> JSON: >>>> { "Location" : { >>>> "propertyName" : "location", >>>> "value" : "Hennepin Technical College", >>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc", >>>> "mappingType" : "exact", >>>> "locationLabel" : "Hennepin Technical College", >>>> "longitude" : 0, >>>> "latitude" : 0, >>>> "altitude" : 0, >>>> "statusCode" : 200 >>>> } >>>> >>>> RDF: >>>> <ma:createdIn> >>>> <ma:Location> >>>> <ma:locationName> >>>> Hennepin Technical College >>>> </ma:locationName> >>>> </ma:Location> >>>> </ma:createdIn> >>>> >>>> Since there is no information about longitude, latitude, and altitude >>>> in RDF available, I suggest to remove these attributes in the >>>> corresponding JSON result set as well. >>>> >>>> Keyword: >>>> JSON: >>>> { "Keyword" : { >>>> "propertyName" : "keyword", >>>> "value" : "Dublin Core Meta Tags", >>>> "language" : "en", >>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc", >>>> "mappingType" : "exact", >>>> "keywordLabel" : "Dublin Core Meta Tags", >>>> "statusCode" : 200 >>>> } >>>> RDF: >>>> <ma:hasKeyword rdf:parseType="Resource"> >>>> <rdfs:label> >>>> Dublin Core Meta Tags >>>> </rdfs:label> >>>> </ma:hasKeyword> >>>> >>>> There is no language information about keyword in RDF, therefore I >>>> would suggest to remove the language attribute in the JSON result >>> set. >>>> >>>> >>>> Copyright >>>> JSON >>>> { "Copyright" : { >>>> "propertyName" : "copyright", >>>> "value" : "Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights >>> reserved.", >>>> "sourceFormat" : "dc", >>>> "mappingType" : "related", >>>> "copyrightLabel" : "Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights >>>> reserved.", >>>> "statusCode" : 200 >>>> } >>>> RDF: >>>> <ma:isCopyrightedBy> >>>> <ma:Organisation> >>>> <rdfs:label >>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"> >>>> Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights reserved. >>>> </rdfs:label> >>>> </ma:Organisation> >>>> </ma:isCopyrightedBy> >>>> >>>> DC: >>>> <dc:rights> >>>> Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights reserved. >>>> </dc:rights> >>>> >>>> ma:isCopyrightedBy is used to describe the copyright holder not the >>>> copyright itself (copyrightLabel in JSON). Corresponding JSON >>>> attribute for ma:isCopyrightedBy is holderLabel. >>>> Moreover, a copyright.holder is optional, whereas copyright is >>>> required >>>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-mediaont-10-20120209/#core-property- >>>> lists). >>>> To solve this issue I suggest to turn the existing ma:isCopyrightedBy >>>> relation into a ma:copyright relation in RDF like this: >>>> >>>> <ma:copyright>Copyright 2007, Alan Kelsey, Ltd. All rights >>>> reserved.</ma:copyright> >>>> >>>> Another possible solution would be to split the orginal DC data about >>>> rights into 2 different RDF relations (ma:rights and >>>> ma:isCopyrightedBy). >>>> >>>> >>>> My comments about the youtube JSON result document should be >>> available >>>> next Monday. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>>>> Von: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org] >>>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Juni 2012 12:41 >>>>> An: Höffernig, Martin >>>>> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org >>>>> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [ACTION-472] Compile list of status code >>> issues >>>> / >>>>> additional issues >>>>> >>>>> Martin, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> OK it seems there are inconsistencies between the TTL, RDF and XML >>>>> examples. >>>>> >>>>> The TTL files are informative only. >>>>> The RDF files are normative and serves as the input to the API >>>>> outputting JSON Responses. >>>>> >>>>> Therefore RDF and JSON Files MUST be in Synch. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> for example, let see this for the EBUCore tests >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The XMl is incorrect (should not list VENEZUELA location) The RDF >>> is >>>>> correct ( lists only VENEZUELA location) The TTL is correct ( lists >>>>> only VENEZUELA location) The JSON is incorrect (should not list >>>>> VENEZUELA location) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> see explanation following. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> the EBUCore XML >>>>> --------------- >>>>> >>>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EB >>>>> U >>>>> CoreXML_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> >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --> It provides the "VENEZUELA" location and the "CARACAS" location >>>>> >>>>> the EBUCore RDF >>>>> --------------- >>>>> >>>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EB >>>>> U >>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.owl >>>>> >>>>> ... >>>>> <rdf:Description rdf:about="EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS"><rdf:type >>>>> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/ns/ma-ont#Location"/><rdfs:label >>>>> >>>> >>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">CARACAS</rdfs:l >>>>> a >>>>> bel></rdf:Description> >>>>> ... >>>>> --> It does not provide the "VENEZUELA" location, only the >>> "CARACAS" >>>>> location >>>>> >>>>> the EBUCore TTL >>>>> --------------- >>>>> >>>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/EB >>>>> U >>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.ttl >>>>> >>>>> ... >>>>> <EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS> >>>>> a ma-ont:Location ; >>>>> rdfs:label >>>> "CARACAS"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> >>>>> . >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --> It does not provide the "VENEZUELA" location, only the >>> "CARACAS" >>>>> location >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> the EBUCore 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 >>>>> } >>>>> }, >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --> It provides the "VENEZUELA" location and the "CARACAS" location >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Le 12/06/2012 11:49, Höffernig, Martin a écrit : >>>>>> Thierry, >>>>>> >>>>>> please note that I assume that the corresponding ontology >>> document >>>>> only - not the original metadata example - is the basis for >>> creating >>>>> JSON response data sets for a given format. >>>>>> >>>>>> see my comments in-line. >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>>>>>> Von: Thierry MICHEL [mailto:tmichel@w3.org] >>>>>>> Gesendet: Montag, 11. Juni 2012 16:04 >>>>>>> An: Höffernig, Martin >>>>>>> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org >>>>>>> Betreff: 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/ >>>>> E >>>>>>> BU >>>>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.xml >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> <coverage><spatial><location >>>>>>> typeLink="cptype:city"><name>CARACAS</name></location><location >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> typeLink="cptype:country"><name>VENEZUELA</name><code>country:VE</co >>>>> d >>>>>>> e> >>>>>>> </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 >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> }, >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes that's correct. However, in the corresponding ontology >>> example >>>>> >>>> >>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/E >>>>> B >>>>> UCoreXML_ITM528229_extended.ttl) only 1 location has been >>> described, >>>>> namely EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS (see below). >>>>>> >>>>>> <tag:ebu.ch,2011:528229> >>>>>> ma-ont:createdIn<EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS> ; >>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> <EBUNMSCityCode:CARACAS> >>>>>> a ma-ont:Location ; >>>>>> rdfs:label >>>>> "CARACAS"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> . >>>>>> >>>>>> Therefore, as the ontology document serves as the basis for the >>>> JSON >>>>> response, only CARACAS can be part of the JSON result set. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> NamedFragment - NamedFragements in JSON, however no >>>>>>>> ma:hasNamedFragment relations in ontology >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the EBUCore XML >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/ >>>>> E >>>>>>> BU >>>>>>> CoreXML_ITM528229_extended.xml >>>>>>> >>>>>>> in the Ontlogy exact mapping from >>>>>>> namedFragment to hasPart >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Since there are no ma:hasNamedFragments relation in the ontology >>>>> example, no NamedFragments can be part of the JSON result. However, >>>>> ma:hasFragment relations exist, Fragment properties - not >>>>> NamedFragments - can be retrieved and part of the JSON response. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In the ID3 ontology example >>>>> >>>> >>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/I >>>>> D >>>>> 3_bach.ttl) there is no further role information about >>> contributors, >>>>> formalized as sub properties, available. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> }, >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In the LOM ontology example >>>>> >>>> >>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/L >>>>> O >>>>> M_sample_v1.ttl) there is no data about frame size as well as >>>> duration. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no ma:copyright relation in the corresponding ontology >>>>> document >>>>> >>>> >>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/m >>>>> r >>>>> ss_sample_rdf.ttl ). >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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> >>>>> < >>>>>>> /G >>>>>>> enre><Genre >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> href="urn:tva:metadata:cs:IntentionCS:2005:1.2"><Name>INFORM</Name>< >>>>> / >>>>>>> Ge >>>>>>> nre><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 >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Only 1 ma:TargetAudience instance in ontology docoument >>>>> >>>> >>> (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/metadata_formats/T >>>>> V AXML_2_MAONTRDF_20100914BBCNewsTF_pl_pi_prog22_extended.ttl ) >>>>> available. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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_implement >>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>> 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 Wednesday, 20 June 2012 10:12:22 UTC