- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:10:29 +0100
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: Jacco van Ossenbruggen <Jacco.van.Ossenbruggen@cwi.nl>, swbp <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, mf@w3.org
Dan Brickley wrote: > > +cc: Max Froumentin > > Jacco van Ossenbruggen wrote: > >> >> Hi all, >> >> I just bumbed into this and was wondering if this working group has, >> or needs to have, an opinion about the Last Call EMMA draft at >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/emma/ >> >> The language is described as a language for annotation and metadata. >> Personally, I would have expected it to build on RDF, but it doesn't. >> In fact, the word RDF isn't mentioned at all, while it spends quite >> some sentences on its (rather complicated) relationship with XML. Is >> it reasonable to ask them to clarify the relationship with RDF/OWL too? > http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2004/01/21/multimodal.html has a few words on the RDF possibilities that were considered. FWIW another W3C language that's essential media metadata is the TimedText work. http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/ (maybe i already mentioned that here, i forget...) Dan > > > I spent some time talking with Max (cc:'d) earlier in the design. RDF > was certainly > considered. My understanding was that the need to attach probabilistic > and other > metadata at a per-property level, made usage of RDF unwieldy (rdf's > current > reification vocab is just no practical there). Max, perhaps you could > expand? Is there > a pointer to earlier RDF-ish designs somewhere? > > Dan
Received on Friday, 30 September 2005 15:08:18 UTC