On 04/04/2012 08:16 PM, Ignacio Serantes wrote: > Looks more near reality and more 3 normal form but seems a little bit > complex and I think that a relation n:n is missing between nmm:Concert
not really complex from a usage point of view as you only need to decide on one type. The rest comes through inheritance. > <-> nmm:ConcertVideo. There are video concerts recorded in two or more > concerts, What do you mean here exactly? One concert split over several videos? > the same for discs, and one concert could have more than one > video editions, or disc editions. Hm, that is true. We did not look into that yet. So what are the possibilities here? nmm:Album nie:hasLogicalPart nmm:AlbumDisc? > On the other side I'm not sure how nmm:Concert and nmm:LiveMusicPiece > could be implemented in strigi analyzers because there is no support at > all in audio files for this kind of information. Well, that is information that could be added separately like for tv shows. > Finally to be coherent we need a nmm:StudioMusicPiece, at same level as > nmm:LiveMusicPiece, because we have nmm:LiveMusicVideo and > nmm:MusicVideoVideo and we don't want different structure in audio and > video to store the same concepts. agreed. So maybe also StudioMusicVideo instead of MusicVideoVideo. :P Cheers, Sebastian > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Sebastian Trüg <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > looks very nice indeed. Would you thus propose to double-type live > performance videos with nmm:MusicVideo and nmm:LivePerformance? > > How about the attached layout instead. > > We simply derive the live video and audio from the same live base class. > That way we can easily query all live performances, be it audio or > video. > Also I added an intermediate class nmm:MusicVideo and the badly named > nmm:MusicVideoVideo which is supposed to be typical music videos as you > get from performers for mtv and stuff. > That way we can also easily query for videos that contain music in > any form. > > What do you think? > > Cheers, > Sebastian > > On 04/04/2012 07:26 PM, Andrew Lake wrote: > > nmm:TVShow is a subclass of nfo:Media so yes, it should be okay to > do that. :-) > > > > peace and much respect, > > Andrew > > > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Ignacio Serantes <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> Assuming that nmm:TVShow could be used instead nfo:Media seems > good for me > >> :). > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Andrew Lake <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks for taking the time to put this together Sebastian. > >>> > >>> I wonder if it would be possible to push a simpler class > >>> nmm:LivePerformance up above the media type (audio/music/video). > >>> Perhaps just subclassed from nfo:Media, since we could have audio or > >>> video live performances. Then perhaps we could just add the type to > >>> any existing audio, music, video, tv show, etc. resource to indicate > >>> it is a live performance. A concert then is just a special type of > >>> live performance that can have multiple live performances. It might > >>> even have unique properties like location, numberOfPerformers, > >>> tourStops, etc. > >>> > >>> Based on what you came up with and Ignacio's comments, I've > attached a > >>> png that captures what I'm thinking might work. > >>> > >>> Hope this helps, > >>> Andrew > >>> > >>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Ignacio Serantes <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>>> In a second view I have some remarks: > >>>> > >>>> Why nmm:MusicVideo is related to nmm:LiveMusicPerformance? > There are > >>>> totally > >>>> independent without any relation. > >>>> nmm:MusicVideo must be related to many nmm:MusicPiece as > >>>> nmm:LiveMusicPerformance. This is a very uncommon case but > there is a > >>>> few > >>>> music video clips related to more than on song. > >>>> I'm assuming a 0:n cardinality because I have several live > performances > >>>> related to a nmm:MusicPiece I don't own. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Sebastian Trüg > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi guys, > >>>>> > >>>>> I quickly drew little diagrams trying to summarize again. > Please tell > >>>>> me > >>>>> what I missed: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1.png is the example of a concert which is split into live > performances > >>>>> or certain music pieces. Still missing are the DataObject > parts. There > >>>>> could be a filedataobject for all of them or only for the > concert. in > >>>>> the latter case the rest would be embedded data objects or we need > >>>>> something new like "part of a dataobject". > >>>>> 2.png is the relationship between the classes. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> Sebastian > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Best wishes, > >> Ignacio > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > Best wishes, > Ignacio > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Nepomuk mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk _______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
