Another abandoned server code base... this is kind of an ancestor of taskrambler.
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
 
 
 
 
 
 

420 lines
36 KiB

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<meta name="generator" content="HTML Tidy for Linux/x86 (vers 12 April 2005), see www.w3.org"/>
<title>MAWG - TPAC 2008 f2f -- 23 Oct 2008</title>
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href="http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/base.css"/>
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href="http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/public.css"/>
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/minutes-style.css"/>
<meta content="MAWG - TPAC 2008 f2f" name="Title"/>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"/>
</head>
<body><p><a href="http://www.w3.org/"><img src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" alt="W3C"
border="0" height="48" width="72"/></a></p><h1>MAWG - TPAC 2008
f2f</h1><h2>23 Oct 2008</h2><p><a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Meeting_Agenda_(DRAFT)">
Agenda</a></p><p>See also: <a href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-irc">IRC
log</a></p><h2><a name="attendees" id="attendees">Attendees</a></h2><div class="intro">
<dl>
<dt>Present</dt>
<dd>Daniel, Wonsuk, Joakim, Veronique, Frank, Fabio, Erik, Davy, Felix, Silvia, Colm,
Frank_(Canon), Herve, Daniel_(Expway), Youenn, Joerg, Karen, guillaume</dd>
<dt>Regrets</dt>
<dt>Chair</dt>
<dd>Daniel, Felix</dd>
<dt>Scribe</dt>
<dd>fsasaki, raphael, Felix, erik</dd>
</dl>
</div><h2>Contents</h2><ul>
<li>
<a href="#agenda">Topics</a>
<ol>
<li><a href="#item01">meeting start</a></li>
<li><a href="#item02">Introduction of the participants</a></li>
<li><a href="#item03">charter review</a></li>
<li><a href="#item04">MMSEM presentation</a></li>
<li><a href="#item05">questionnaire on formats in scope / out of scope</a></li>
<li><a href="#item06">presentations on specific formats</a></li>
<li><a href="#item07">Top-Down Modelling Approach</a></li>
<li><a href="#item08">requirements</a></li>
<li><a href="#item09">requirements document timeline</a></li>
</ol></li>
<li><a href="#ActionSummary">Summary of Action Items</a></li>
</ul><hr/><div class="meeting"><h3 id="item01">meeting start</h3><p class="phone"><a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Meeting_Agenda_(DRAFT)">
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Meeting_Agenda_(DRAFT)</a></p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>scribe</cite>&gt; scribe: raphael</p><h3 id="item02">Introduction of
the participants</h3><p class="phone"><cite>Daniel:</cite> Chair of the group, work in
Samsung, first time participation in W3C activities<br/> ... co-chair an internet protocol
WG in IETF</p><p class="phone"><cite>Wunsok:</cite> Research Institute in Korea</p><p
class="phone"><cite>Joakim:</cite> Erikson (operating system for mobile phones), interest in
IPTV<br/> ... background in image classification, indexing and retrieval</p><p
class="phone"><cite>Veronique:</cite> Vrij Universiteit in Amsterdam, work in the Cultural
Heritage Domain</p><p class="phone"><cite>Frank:</cite> assistant professor in UvA in
Amsterdam, worked in the MPEG-7 WG (responsible for DDL)</p><p class="phone"
><cite>Fabio:</cite> Paris, Thomson, interest in video over P2P</p><p class="phone"
><cite>Erik:</cite> project manager in IBBT in Ghent (Belgium), co-chair of the Media
Fragment WG, work with broadcasters and in the cultural heritage domain</p><p class="phone"
><cite>Davy:</cite> researcher in IBBT Ghent, multimedia annotation</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; Raphael: was co-chair of MMSEM XG, now co-chair of
media-fragments WG. Interested on NLP apllications and multimedia.</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; .. used to work previously in cultural domain setting</p><p
class="phone"><cite>Guillaume:</cite> South Africa, interest in languages, content
management systems ... would like to consider videos as real structured documents</p><p
class="phone"><cite>Felix:</cite> W3C staff contact, background in using XML-based or
RDF-based languages for representing linguistics resources<br/> ... will leave W3C in March,
there will be another staff contact</p><p class="phone"><cite>Silvia:</cite> run her own
company in Australia, did Annodex, CMML, TemporalURI, work with Mozilla on accessibility of
Video, active in the Open Source community</p><p class="phone">Colm Doyle: technical
director of Blinx, a video company</p><p class="phone"><cite>Frank:</cite> observer from
Canon research in France, what could be the link with the Media Fragment WG</p><p
class="phone">Herve: also observer from Canon</p><p class="phone"><cite>David:</cite>
Expway, expert in binarization of XML data, interest in media annotations</p><p
class="phone"><cite>Johan:</cite> observer from Canon, want to get an idea of what is going
on here</p><p class="phone"><cite>Daniel:</cite> going through the charter and the goals of
the group</p><h3 id="item03">charter review</h3><p class="phone"><cite>Daniel:</cite> goals
is to provide a minimal ontology for representing metadata + to provide an API for accessing
video metadata<br/> ... timeline is sharp<br/> ... goal of this f2f is to have quickly first
draft documents</p><p class="phone"><cite>Felix:</cite> there will be a lot of missing
pieces, this is the purpose<br/> ... we want to get quickly feedback from a wider
community</p><p class="phone"><cite>Daniel:</cite> shows the wiki page<br/> ... goes through
the Use Case &amp; Requirements wiki page<br/> ... we will have another F2F meeting, in
Ghent (Belgium) on 9 and 10 December</p><p class="phone"><cite>Felix:</cite> 2 more people
join</p><p class="phone"><cite>Heuir:</cite> AC Rep of Siemens, Munich (DE), I was active in
MPEG for descibing content of audio-visual content</p><p class="phone">Karen Myers:
W3C</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; scribe: Felix</p><h3 id="item04">MMSEM
presentation</h3><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; slides at <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/mmsem/talks/MUSE2007/"
>http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/mmsem/talks/MUSE2007/</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; joakim: looking at liaisons - who is member of I3A?</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; raphael: adobe, canon, many camera people</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; .. similiar membership as IPTC</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; .. difference between I3A and IPTC metadata is that in I3A
there is four blocks of meta data</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; .. problem
is that I3A (DIG35 metadata) is licensed, we had asked for tools for processing it, but
there isn't</p><a name="action01" id="action01"/>
<p class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt;
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to add a link from WG page to the "still alive" MMSEM wiki
pages and to make sure that everybody can edit the pages [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action01"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action01</a>]</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>trackbot</cite>&gt; Created ACTION-20 - Add a link from WG page to the \"still
alive\" MMSEM wiki pages and to make sure that everybody can edit the pages [on Felix Sasaki
- due 2008-10-30].</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>scribe</cite>&gt; scribenick: erik</p><h3
id="item05">questionnaire on formats in scope / out of scope</h3><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; scribe: erik</p><p class="phone">felix goes over
questionnaire in-scope vs out-of-scope</p><p class="phone"><cite>joakim:</cite> linking
between standards is desirable</p><p class="phone">joakim/guillaume: is thumbnail data or
metadata? it depends on UC</p><p class="phone">daniel/raphael: what is real definition of
"media" in this WG?</p><p class="phone"><cite>daniel:</cite> primarily img, audio, video
from questionnaire</p><p class="phone"><cite>felix:</cite> methodology of interrelating
existing ontologies might be good way to look at things</p><p class="phone"
><cite>veronique:</cite> maybe start from UC and find out what standards we need to
describe</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> what do we really want? ... not excluding
media (cfr. exif)</p><p class="phone"><cite>daniel:</cite> focus should be video</p><p
class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> "temporal media" covers better the scope</p><p
class="phone"><cite>felix:</cite> discussion formats in-scope vs. out-of-scope should be
video central (but the it should be looked at format by format if there's a good link)</p><p
class="phone"><cite>erik:</cite> within Media Fragments WG, video is key (together with
audio, image &amp; timed text)</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> even broadening and
maybe considering haptic media too</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> motto keep it
simple ... thus parts of MPEG-7 too low-level (color histograms)<br/> ... try to see overlap
between all standards, then you probably already have some top-level stuff to start
with</p><p class="phone">consensus out-of-scope: MPEG-21, SVG, SMIL</p><h3 id="item06"
>presentations on specific formats</h3><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; raphael
presenting on IPTC photo meta data</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>fsasaki</cite>&gt; scribe:
fsasaki</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> white paper IPTC photo metadata white
paper in 2007<br/> ... IPTC photo metadata become a standard recently<br/> ... white paper
authored by photo / image industry<br/> ... blocks: format descriptive, administrative,
rights, technical<br/> ... each block points to some properties<br/> ... e.g. to EXIF</p><p
class="phone">raphael describes some properties</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite>
properties have names or controlled vocabularies<br/> ... e.g. for location they have geo
names URI<br/> ... for person they propose controlled vocabularies, e.g. wikipedia<br/> ...
in administrative: lots of things from EXIF, location from others<br/> ... rights metadata:
they re-use plus<br/> ... for technical properties: EXIF + some additional properties<br/>
... physical type of original is enumerated list</p><p class="phone"><cite>joakim:</cite>
how about different video formats?</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> it is for still
images, not video</p><p class="phone"><cite>rapahael:</cite> the white paper was from 2007.
Open issue: how to identify images?<br/> ... they use URIs to identify images<br/> ... they
developed their own URI (HTTP URI) based scheme, not registered with IANA, but they have
registered other schemes<br/> ... all metadata is embedded in a file, e.g. header of JPEG
file<br/> ... currently anybody can modify the metadata<br/> ... so they don't know if
somebody has modified the data<br/> ... it happens often in the image industry, that authors
change the date of an image to have it published<br/> ... so the publisher want to have
waterproof techniques to avoid these problems</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> a
field said "maxium resultion is ..."<br/> ... how do they handle cases where the resultion
does not fit?</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> currently they copy the metadata, so
they have the danger of inconsitencies</p><p class="phone">going through the fields</p><p
class="phone">no headline field</p><p class="phone">description - as a general field</p><p
class="phone">location, person, event</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> encourage
users to use a controlled vocabulary, say "this SHOULD be used", not with a MUST</p><p
class="phone"><cite>guillaume:</cite> would be good to separate description and caption,
also in the video</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> description is general</p><p
class="phone"><cite>Colm:</cite> there is captioning, close captioning, summary, OCRing as
another track, logos, facial recognition etc.<br/> ... these all needs indiviudal tags</p><p
class="phone"><cite>guillaume:</cite> hard to derive properties from these, better to
describe properties from this</p><p class="phone">Joakim, Raphael: better to have general
properties that can be specialized</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> who, what, when,
why, where are important 5 "w"</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite> for some properties
there might be multiple occurences, that is different cardinality</p><p class="phone">there
are different kinds of "locations", agreement that a location field is necessary, still need
to decide whether one field, 2, more, ...</p><p class="phone">and how (hierachically) the
properties should be structured</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; distinguish
cataloging properties versus descriptive properties</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; ... thus not that bad to have different who, where, when, etc.
for where the media has been captured, versus what it depicts</p><p class="phone"
><cite>raphael:</cite> "who, when, what, where"<br/> ... see dublin core</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; Dublin Core new Task Metadadata: <a
href="http://dublincore.org/kernelwiki/FrontPage?action=AttachFile&amp;do=get&amp;target=KernelMetadataERCApplicationProfiles1_4a.htm"
>
http://dublincore.org/kernelwiki/FrontPage?action=AttachFile&amp;do=get&amp;target=KernelMetadataERCApplicationProfiles1_4a.htm</a></p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>erik</cite>&gt; s/metadadata/metadata</p><p class="phone"
><cite>veronique:</cite> should properties here be also linked together in this
group?</p><p class="phone"><cite>daniel:</cite> after verifying relationship between
standards we can have a common ontology in W3C<br/> ... but we cannot have much more</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; +1 for V�ronique: this is most likely the hardest
issue this group will have to solve</p><p class="phone"><cite>felix:</cite> maybe not even
mapping, just describe what is commonly used</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt;
I would like to have relationships between the properties ... but add serious
complexity</p><p class="phone"><cite>daniel:</cite> assuming that metadata type A has a
"film" field, and type B has a "movie" field. We want to be able to work across these,
right?</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; +1 for Guillaume: modeling provenance
of the metadata is important too</p><p class="phone"><cite>guillaume:</cite> do we want to
document where metadata came from?</p><p class="phone">example in terms of API: having a
method "getLength" which gives you back the length and the origin (type) of metadata</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Karen</cite>&gt; Felix reviews document from Metadata Working
Group</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; I'm not sure we should go into a
conflict resolution mechanism</p><p class="phone"><cite>Felix:</cite> should we also go for
such a conflict resolution mechanism as in the mwp guidance doc?</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; I would prefer to have the ontology modeling all the
necessary provenance information ... and let the application deals with that</p><p
class="phone">agreement to have no such conflict resolution mechanism</p><h3 id="item07"
>Top-Down Modelling Approach</h3><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>guillaume</cite>&gt;
<a href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top-Down_Modelling_Approach">
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top-Down_Modelling_Approach</a></p><p
class="phone"><cite>Felix:</cite> is this an alternative approach to the bottom-up
approach?</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> no, we should do both at the same
time</p><p class="phone">frank continues presentation on "top down" appraoch</p><p
class="phone"><cite>veronique:</cite> search and annotation are two parts of the same
coin</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> true<br/> ... starting "top down" will help us
to get the highlights we need<br/> ... proposal is to achieve a minimal set of properties by
looking at use cases, overlap when, see what standards have, is that what we need, and so we
link to them</p><p class="phone"><cite>guillaume:</cite> do we first need to make a list of
tasks we want to support?</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> I think such a list would
help to set priorities</p><p class="phone"><cite>joakim:</cite> the "browse" task is
different from "search"</p><p class="phone"><cite>veronique:</cite> search and browse is
like accessing the data</p><p class="phone"><cite>frank:</cite> analyze is in the direction
of "working with material"</p><p class="phone"><cite>felix:</cite> propose to take the
material in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top-Down_Modelling_Approach">
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Top-Down_Modelling_Approach</a> in the
requirements document into account</p><p class="phone"><cite>veronique:</cite> link between
different tasks and existing standards can be a way to describe fields of different
standards</p><p class="phone">agreement to put the material into the requirements
document</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; going through our use cases one by
one and editing by wiki pages</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; Cultural
Heritage UC</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; not only audio and video for the
cultural heritage, but also we should think about others media types ?</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; Felix is drawing on the board</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; UC: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/CulturalHeritageUC">
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/CulturalHeritageUC</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; getting a data for annotation voca. how to use and change it
can be parts of API draft</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>FD</cite>&gt; Felix: Example of a get
API to get date information: getDate(URI, vocabulary)</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>FD</cite>&gt; Felix: vocabulary parameter could be "EXIF" for example</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; just moving UC discussion forward, and consider API
issue later</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; coming back to the UC
review...</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; some of low lever description can be
parts of requirements...ex, interop. search, deploymet, fragment. etc</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; fragment parts may belong to another group (e.g., media
fragment WG)</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; where to store URI and fragmented
information ?</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; next UC: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/VideoUC"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/VideoUC</a></p><p class="phone"
>discussing "The goal of this WG is to clean up this jungle and make our ontology support of
commonly used properties for describing video content."</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; changing the above text into "the bridging of commonly used
properties for..."</p><a name="action02" id="action02"/>
<p class="irc">&lt;<cite>scribe</cite>&gt;
<strong>ACTION:</strong> guillaume to write a use case "interaction, navigation" [recorded
in <a href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action02"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action02</a>]</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>trackbot</cite>&gt; Sorry, couldn't find user - guillaume</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; newly adding "We do not aim to solve the semantic mismatch
problem but leave it to the schemes which are used for annotation/retrievel" at the bottom
of Example</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; new text proposed: We do not aim to
solve the semantic mismatch problem but leave that to the application who creates the
annotation / retrieval.</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; mapping between the
different metadata may take palce in the Ontology document of the WG later.</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; UC: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MobileUC"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MobileUC</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; Mobile use case already widely spreaded in the world...</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; geolocation info when contents generated...and use
location are both valuable aspects.</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt;
geolocation in the web, for example: life logging...</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; Raphael: I would point to a liaison with <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/">http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/</a></p><p
class="phone">raphael, good point</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; looking at
Geolocation WG charter and homepage on the screen</p><a name="action03" id="action03"/>
<p class="irc">&lt;<cite>scribe</cite>&gt;
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to create a liaison to Geolocation WG [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action03"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action03</a>]</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>trackbot</cite>&gt; Created ACTION-21 - Create a liaison to Geolocation WG [on
Felix Sasaki - due 2008-10-30].</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; discussion:
Support media adaptation for mobile device capabilities such as bandwidth, physical screen,
audio and text. Media adaptation depending on business models and user preferences.</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; targeting for describing mobile device
characteristics (screen size, codec style, etc)...in scope or out of scope ?</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; related activities are in OMA (Open Mobile Alliance)
today</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; how to describe device characteristics
is pretty different from media scope</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; dinner
tonight together...:-)</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; PLING joint meeting
tomorrow about Multimedia sharing</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; Mobile TV is
deleted...</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; also, Geographic Location/Privacy
WG in IETF: <a href="http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/geopriv-charter.html"
>http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/geopriv-charter.html</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; resume: UC: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MultimediaPresentationUC">
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MultimediaPresentationUC</a></p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; 7:30 .at lobby for dinner tonight</p><p
class="phone">s/40 /30 /</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; adding a new
sentence: "The WG is likely not to concentrate on this use case in the beginning but might
come back to it later"</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; UC: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/RecommendUC"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/RecommendUC</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; going through UC</p><p class="phone"><cite>Daniel:</cite>
amazon provides a service where users can search through data aggregated from different
service<br/> ... such a service is similar to what we want to achieve with this UC</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; changing the title of UC: Recommendation across
different media type</p><p class="phone"><cite>Daniel:</cite> title of UC is better
"Recommendation across different media types "<br/> ... for this UC metadata descriptions
need to be unified</p><p class="phone"><cite>Joakim:</cite> AMG has a lot of metadata as a
relational database, about movies, music, games, which is interrelated</p><p class="phone"
><cite>wonsuk:</cite> searching videos in youtube, you get recommendations based on the
video you choose<br/> ... our ontology could help that youtube could provide yahoo and other
videos</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; new UC discussion: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MultimediaSearchUC">
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MultimediaSearchUC</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; question: leave it out or keep as it is...there are several
relative parts in others UCs</p><p class="phone">agreement to cover this UC not seperatly
but cover it as part of other UC and the "top down" section</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; new UC: multimedia sharing</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; no initial text for this UC</p><p class="phone">agreement not
to cover this UC seperately</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; new UC discussion:
<a href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/PhotoUC"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/PhotoUC</a></p><p class="phone"
>agreement to take this as an input to our main UC video into account</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; new UC discussion: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MusicUC"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/MusicUC</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; changed the title into *Audio*</p><p class="phone">agreement
to take this as an input to our main UC video into account</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; new UC discussion: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/NewsUC"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/NewsUC</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; +1 for music -&gt; audio</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; Veronique: moving it to the relared UC (e.g., museum or
others...) to make broader scope</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; news is a
domain specific use case ... not sure it should stand</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; ... or might be like cultural heritage UC</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; TimeText for karaoke service on the TV, Mobile Phone</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; +1 for raphael suggestion</p><p class="phone"
><cite>Felix:</cite> fine with having, it, just propose to take "XBRL" out of it</p><p
class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; new UC discussion: <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/TaggingUC"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/TaggingUC</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; I am away for a while to glance at AC discussion (future W3C
structure) since I am a AC of my affilition...sorry...</p><p class="phone"
><cite>veronique:</cite> we had said that we just provide a comon means to add / query tags,
across formats, but not tackle the interoperabilty between tags</p><p class="phone"
>agreement within the group</p><h3 id="item08">requirements</h3><p class="phone"><a
href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6109"
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6109</a></p><p class="phone">agreement that
we need a means to have the metadata both in the media and outside</p><p class="phone"
>requirement that we need to register a media type for external meta data</p><p
class="phone"><a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6113"
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6113</a></p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; do you mean a registration at iana ?</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; w3c hates that .... though they have a precedent with
xpointer</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>raphael</cite>&gt; most of W3C folks dislike the
idea</p><p class="phone">raphael, yes, at iana. I have done that before and I'm still alive,
and Philippe is the contact to IETF</p><p class="phone"><a
href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6130"
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6130</a></p><p class="phone">discussing <a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2008Sep/0085.html">
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2008Sep/0085.html</a></p><p
class="phone">we will discuss this with raphael in the room</p><p class="phone">discussing
<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6066"
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6066</a></p><p class="phone">put it on the
list of requirements, see later if we have people pushing for this</p><a name="action04"
id="action04"/>
<p class="irc">&lt;<cite>scribe</cite>&gt;
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to go back to Karen and check about " IPTV metadata
specification" - what is it, is it available for us? [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action04"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action04</a>]</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>trackbot</cite>&gt; Created ACTION-22 - Go back to Karen and check about \"
IPTV metadata specification\" - what is it, is it available for us? [on Felix Sasaki - due
2008-10-30].</p><p class="phone">going back to <a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2008Sep/0085.html">
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2008Sep/0085.html</a></p><p
class="phone"><cite>joakim:</cite> distinction between abstract works and instances is
good<br/> ... not sure what "manifestation" is</p><p class="phone"><cite>raphael:</cite>
example for work is "work from S.B. Bach". Expression is "particular performance by an
orchestra"<br/> ... manifestation is "recording in a particular year". Item is "this
CD"<br/> ... we can have this model for describing things, but do we have use cases for
it?</p><p class="phone"><cite>veronique:</cite> we have only two levels - manifestation and
expression<br/> ... we can have just one layer but allow people to have a specialization
for using their scheme</p><p class="phone">discussion on usage of various models, their
(wide?) usage</p><p class="phone">so no final resolution yet about this requirement - but we
will put it in the WD and say "we are not sure about this requirement yet" and also ask the
public for feedback</p><p class="phone">above is issue 6130</p><p class="phone"
><cite>veronique:</cite> maybe specific to cultural heritage use case<br/> ... and have
this requirement as something we tackle after the first version of the ontology is
done</p><h3 id="item09">requirements document timeline</h3><p class="phone">on <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6113"
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6113</a> again: proposal is to have for
each property just a set of getter and setter function. Question: how does that relate to
(hierarchy of) properties in the ontology</p><p class="phone">having initial version of the
document in the next days, around a week for review within the working group, and
publication of first WD after</p><p class="irc">&lt;<cite>Daniel</cite>&gt; rssagent, draft
minutes</p><a name="action05" id="action05"/>
<p class="irc">&lt;<cite>scribe</cite>&gt;
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to explain XMLSPEC to wonsuk [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action05"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action05</a>]</p><p class="irc"
>&lt;<cite>trackbot</cite>&gt; Created ACTION-23 - Explain XMLSPEC to wonsuk [on Felix
Sasaki - due 2008-10-30].</p><p class="phone">adjourned for today</p></div><h2><a
name="ActionSummary" id="ActionSummary">Summary of Action
Items</a></h2><!-- Action Items -->
<strong>[NEW]</strong>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to add a link from WG page to the "still alive" MMSEM wiki pages
and to make sure that everybody can edit the pages [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action01"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action01</a>]<br/>
<strong>[NEW]</strong>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to create a liaison to Geolocation WG [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action03"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action03</a>]<br/>
<strong>[NEW]</strong>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to explain XMLSPEC to wonsuk [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action05"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action05</a>]<br/>
<strong>[NEW]</strong>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> Felix to go back to Karen and check about " IPTV metadata
specification" - what is it, is it available for us? [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action04"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action04</a>]<br/>
<strong>[NEW]</strong>
<strong>ACTION:</strong> guillaume to write a use case "interaction, navigation" [recorded in <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action02"
>http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-mediaann-minutes.html#action02</a>]<br/> &nbsp;<br/> [End of
minutes]<br/><hr/><address> Minutes formatted by David Booth's <a
href="http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm"> scribe.perl</a>
version 1.133 (<a href="http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/">CVS log</a>)<br/> $Date:
2008/10/23 16:04:00 $ </address></body>
</html>