W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > June 2017

Re: VR schema proposal - need some help

From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 19:37:35 +0000
Message-ID: <CAChbWaM=TpHMFPKoHz9tSwWMDMLa2PAvJMYAt05FzDqPdXveNQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>
Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, Aaron Abbott <aaron@persuasivedata.com>, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>, public-mixedreality@w3.org, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>, Dave Lorenzini <davelorenzini@gmail.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Sure that's fine.  But...

I'd prefer to get other industry players, not just Aaron's 1 client
perspective.
That's all I am saying.  This has a impact on a large domain that is
already fast moving and going through rapid change.  Let's get those other
companies viewpoints as well.

For instance, Aaron who is the manufacturer of this particular camera they
use ?
Knowing if it actually produces some metadata, or at least reviewing a spec
sheet from its objects can help us quite a bit.

Is a clump of images for some VR usage really need to be labeled as
VirtualRealityObject ?  Or is this simply a "movie" or "set of moving
images" ?  That's what I am trying to surface.  Aaron is not really
providing some concrete details, and I'd like to hear from other
competitors in the VR industry as well for broader alignment if we are
going to start broadly.  (Hello Facebook and Google!)

-Thad
+ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
Received on Monday, 19 June 2017 19:38:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 19 June 2017 19:38:21 UTC