W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > October 2005

RE: [MM] Timing of Mike & Libby's review

From: Uschold, Michael F <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 06:32:33 -0700
Message-ID: <4301AFA5A72736428DA388B73676A381B4CBEB@XCH-NW-6V1.nw.nos.boeing.com>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
Cc: "Jacco van Ossenbruggen" <Jacco.van.Ossenbruggen@cwi.nl>, "Libby Miller" <libby@asemantics.com>, "swbp" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

This is fine, no further remarks.

When will the document be ready for review?


-----Original Message-----
From: RaphaŽl Troncy [mailto:Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl] 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 5:06 AM
To: Uschold, Michael F
Cc: Jacco van Ossenbruggen; Libby Miller; swbp
Subject: Re: [MM] Timing of Mike & Libby's review

Dear Mike,

> Yes, I will. I couldn't stop myself from having a peak at the draft as 
> of Friday, Here are a few comments:

Thanks for your advanced comments. You will find inline some answers to these remarks.
Please note that the working draft [1] should be ready for review on Thursday, 27th of October (today).

> You make a very bold claim:
> "The best solution to this problem covering almost all the present and 
> future uses of the content is the description and archiving of each 
> photo with the aid of a tool providing a semantic metadata structure 
> using the Semantic Web technologies "

You were right and this claim has been removed. We talk now about possible solutions, giving illustration and concrete examples. We try to discuss also the various possibilities if any.

> The best solution for most people today, is to use any of the myriad 
> of photo organization tools out there from the simple and free ones, 
> to the high end pro-oriented ones.  You don't even mention those.

We have addressed this comment in the beginning of section 4.

> Obviously, this note does not address users of these tools, but rather 
> developers.  I'm a serious photographer drowning in over 20,000 slides 
> and another few thousand jpegs. I recognized 15 years ago that I 
> really needed an ontology to categorize them all. I'm still waiting 
> for tools to support this.
> I would like to see this document specifically target developers of 
> photo organizing software for my own selfish reasons, I want to have 
> semantically-enabled tools!

We all want that, at least in this group :-)

> I would love to see a new wave of photo-organization tools with 
> semantic tagging and search. By far the richest one around, of the 
> affordable variety is: Imatch http://www.photools.com/ which has a 
> remarkably rich feature set.
> See: http://www.urban75.org/tech/imatch.html for a [random and 
> possibly dated] review.
> I don't know that such tools could be affordably created for a mass 
> market, but they might work for the pro-sumer and pro markets. One 
> potential benefit in the mass market is for people to share their 
> ontologies using OWL mapping tools. I wish I got paid to do this stuff 
> applied to photography.

Discussion of these tools are out of scope at this moment. However we could discuss at the f2f if and how we should target mass market tool makers to make their products Semantic Web enabled.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/MM/image_annotation.html



RaphaŽl Troncy
CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science), Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093
Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312
Web: http://www.cwi.nl/ins2/
Received on Thursday, 27 October 2005 13:32:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:13 UTC