AW: [EMOXG] Deliverable report published as first draft: Emotion Markup Language: Requirements with Priorities

Dear all
I wholeheartedly agree with Ian.
Greetings,
felix
 

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: public-xg-emotion-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-xg-emotion-request@w3.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Wilson
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Mai 2008 22:48
> An: public-xg-emotion@w3.org
> Betreff: Re: [EMOXG] Deliverable report published as first 
> draft: Emotion Markup Language: Requirements with Priorities
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> With regards to standards and scales I think defining our 
> scales as a normal range should be part of the standards 
> process itself. With undefined or ambiguous scales our 
> standard could loose its iteroperability.
> 
> The MPEG4 animation "standard" reminds me of this as I have 
> interfaced my own system with two other systems that were 
> based on MPEG4 animation and should have therefore been 
> identical but actually had different "interpretations" of the 
> scales required. This is not a good thing for a standard.
> 
> Also, having our scales defined internally does not exclude 
> other systems using our standard from mapping that scale 
> value (0 to 1 or -1 to +1) to whatever system they choose to use.
> 
> I can understand the idea of having the flexibility of user 
> defined scales but I think this may be detrimental to our 
> aims and would guarantee that using data from another 
> publisher of XML would require you to first map their scale 
> to yours. Speaking from experience this is painfull.
> 
> Ian
> 
> --
> Ian Wilson
> CEO
> 
> Emotion AI
> www.emotionai.com
> www.linkedin.com/in/ianwilson/
> ian@emotionai.com
> 
> Company registered in England #6546400
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 08:20:22 UTC