- From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 01:46:34 +0000
- To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Aaron Abbott <aaron@persuasivedata.com>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, Dave Lorenzini <davelorenzini@gmail.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>, public-mixedreality@w3.org, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3KkAn8Do2kVFmxBTvGf_M7F3Tv_w3Vmo4cVHGw1Zjbyg@mail.gmail.com>
Thad, Makes sense to me to have a different group of properties to support MR (AR/VR) application. Ie: AR logo (Bit like ico or flavicon) (denoted with a recommended formats, types and sizes in either 2d or 3d formats). Which may be a property under MrMediaObjects Or something else so we don't have people complaining about patriarchal terminology...?! Tim.h. On Thu., 29 Jun. 2017, 4:54 am Thad Guidry, <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 Thursday, 29 June 2017 01:47:23 UTC