- From: Tobias Bürger <tobias.buerger@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 07:02:08 +0100
- To: public-xg-mmsem@w3.org
Dear all, as promised in the last telecon, please find some comments on the algorithm representation use case [1] in this email. As Raphaël pointed out in his review [2], I think this use case fits very well in the work of the group as it tries to highlight interoperability issues in multimedia processing and how processes can be realized/improved through having semantic descriptions of the content that is processed. I have some comments on your use case and its description in the WIKI: First of all, you only explained an example including singular processing steps, what perhaps would highlight the problems more would be an example including more than one steps to really see where interoperability problems can occur. Perhaps you could also formalize the interoperability issues more as I see them in four different flavors: 1) A <-> A (between algorithms) 2) A <-> D (between algorithms and data) 3) D <-> D (between data and data) 4) O <-> 0 (between ontologies used to describe content and algorithms) An interesting questions would perhaps be: where can data interop. occur (I see this in matching input/output of algorithms)? How can you overcome interoperability issues? Where do you need detailed semantic descriptions of content? How can these exactly be used to improve processes? What I think would help your use case, would be to provide a running example / scenario (this could be your radiology usecase) -> what different algorithms could be used in this case? How should input/output look like - what are the most important properties that it should have (on the metadata level)? What state do you need to record during processing? ... Your use case reminds me very much of the problems that the Semantic Web Service (SWS) - Research aims to tackle: In the WSMO [3] approach for example you have 1) Formal descriptions of executable functions (Web Services)-> this is similar to your formal description in the algorithm ontology 2) Capabilities (what can you achieve by executing this function) -> this is similar to the goal of the algorithm in your case 3) Input / Output 4) ontologies describing the functionality 5) mediators allowing to overcome interoperability issues between input/output formats, goals or ontologies Perhaps you might have a look at [4]. You might also have a look at the GRISINO project [5]. In this project we aim to realise similar things: We try to match content properties with SWS functionality to enable (semi-)automatic distributed multimedia processing. I hope some comments help... Best regards, Tobias [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/mmsem/wiki/Algorithm_representation_Use_case [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-mmsem/2006Oct/0061.html [3] http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSMO-primer/ [4] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/swsig/ [5] http://www.grisino.at -- ________________________________________ Tobias Bürger, http://www.deri.org skype: tobitrautich
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2006 06:04:42 UTC