- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:09:22 -0500
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- CC: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
While people are at it, I notice that there is another spec from the Multimodal Interaction Activity that could use a look. The Extensible Multi-Modal Annotations (EMMA) http://www.w3.org/TR/emma/ working draft says that it provides "an annotative syntax derived from RDF...". However, that's the only mention of RDF in the document, including the references. It would be nice if the relationship were made more explicit. EMMA is also cited as "a target data format for the semantic interpretation [for speech recognition] specification being developed in the Voice Browser Activity" (the Semantic Interpretation for Speech Recognition specification is at http://www.w3.org/TR/semantic-interpretation/ and is also in Last Call). Given that the word "semantic" always seems to set off alarms wherever it appears (and probably ought to!), I hope people in both the Voice Browser Activity and the Semantic Web Activity are working on their stories to explain the relationship between "semantic" in these two contexts, especially since neither the semantic interpretation document nor the Voice Browser Activity page at http://www.w3.org/Voice/ seem to suggest that there is one (ahem!). --Frank Dan Brickley wrote: > * Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> [2004-12-22 15:01+0000] > >> >>A quick glance at this thread indicates that you haven't yet mentioned: >> >>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-DPF-20041122/ >> >>Dynamic Properties Framework (DPF) >> 22 November 2004, David Raggett, Rafah A. Hosn, Sailesh Sathish, >>Keith Waters >> Last Call Ends 10 January 2005 >> >>While this is not in RDF it is about time-sensitive properties of >>resources - hmmm is that the same as time-sensitive resources?? > > > Oh wow, that's in Last Call already. Thanks for the reminder! > > I'm sure they'd appreciate reviews from RDF folks. Also if anyone > has time to try XSLT GRDDLing it into RDF, that would be a valuable > exercise... > > Dan > >
Received on Wednesday, 22 December 2004 20:28:20 UTC