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: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:54:08 +0000
Message-ID: <CAChbWaNo0u70x=Gfb_=f-f4=Xm4ntmbSD=oWUyC7euT6_Na=5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Abbott <aaron@persuasivedata.com>
Cc: Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>, Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.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>
Aaron,

OK, right in that case its still a MediaObject.

But since this object is used in the VR industry, which is still developing
and new formats and new containers are still being created all the time, we
will need to surface those common properties, as Vicki says, into a new
Type for the industry to utilize.  Just don't lose sight of how the
Broadcasting industry also deals with containers and formats that are very
similar in your use case, is all I am asking :)  (your VRObject might just
be a container format that becomes an industry standard later on, and
that's fine also)

To answer your previous previous questions, Yes currently its fine to say
that a particular MediaObject or VRObject can contain many parts such as
many ImageObject's
You can currently use hasPart which is borrowed from CreativeWork to say
that

{
  "@context": "http://schema.org",
  "@type": "MediaObject",
  "contentUrl": "
http://media.example.org/data/0/previews/Edinburgh_Streets.vrn",
  "description": "VRnow scene of part of Edinburgh streets",
  "duration": "T0M60S",
  "encodingFormat": "VRnow",
  "name": "Edinburgh_Streets.vrn",
  "hasPart": [
            {
              "@type": "ImageObject",
              "name": "A pic of Charlotte Square"
            },
            {
              "@type": "ImageObject",
              "name": "A pic of Princes Street"
            }
          ]
}

On the Playground at *http://tinyurl.com/y95vhwdk
<http://tinyurl.com/y95vhwdk>*

Your welcome Aaron !


On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:37 PM Aaron Abbott <aaron@persuasivedata.com>
wrote:

> Thad,
>
> I am meeting with my client tomorrow and will get as many answers and
> details as possible. I will try to get one of their lead developers
> involved on this thread as well. Thanks!
>
> As far as a clump of pictures, it's not like that. The clump of images are
> available, but the final embed is an assembled self-contained media object.
> An similar example would be the use of a SWF from and FLA if we were still
> doing Flash. Like I said though, let me see if I can get them to jump into
> the discussion, and if I can get permission to expose who they are.
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
>
> Aaron Abbott
>
> inbound marketing consultant | marketing technologist | digital media
> remixer
> website:     https://persuasivedata.com
> let's connect:     www.linkedin.com/in/aaronabbott
> *We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams...*
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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 Wednesday, 28 June 2017 18:54:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:12:35 UTC