On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 15:10 +0100, Jos van den Oever wrote: > 2007/2/20, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > 2007/2/20, Jos van den Oever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > 2007/2/19, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Let's get the ball rolling on the metadata spec. This first period will > > just > > > > be *brainstorming*, so let's try and avoid the nitty gritty details for > > now. > > > > > > > > ** What we need: > > > > > > > > Fields) Metadata field names and descriptions for *desktop* objects > > > > > > > > Types) A type grouping of metadata fields to be used in user search > > > > language. Example types could be "Email", "Image", "Audio", etc. > > > > > > > > API) A dbus api to get/set metadata > > > > > > > > ?Tag/Emblem) Tagging/Keywords/Emblems > > > > > > > > ** Starting points/References: > > > > - Adobe XMP: > > > > > > http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/xmp/sdk/XMPspecification.pdf > > > > > > > > - Shared Metadata Spec: > > > > > > http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Standards_2fshared_2dfilemetadata_2dspec > > > > > > - Tracker metadata api: > > > > > > http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/tracker/trunk/data/tracker-introspect.xml?view=markup > > > > > > > > > > - Spotlight Metadata Spec: > > > > > > http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Carbon/Reference/MetadataAttributesRef/Reference/CommonAttrs.html > > > > > > > > > > - Shared Emblem Spec: > > > > > > http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Standards_2fdesktop_2demblem_2dspec > > > > - Others ideas? Nepomuk-specs? Beagle-specs? > > > > > > > > ** My thoughts: > > > > Regarding Fields): To prevent death-by-1000-page-spec I suggest we keep > > the > > > > field names to a core set of commonly used attributes. Ie not like > > Apples > > > > spotlight spec (see above) which defines every known property in the > > > > universe. When things move on, teams with expert knowledge can refine > > > > extensions to this spec. Fx a Wasabi Photography Metadata spec could be > > > > hashed out by people in the know (which could just be EXIF, but I'm not > > the > > > > photography expert). > > > > > > > > Regarding Types): There are some suggestions in the top of the Tracker > > api > > > > link above. Regarding these I think we should leave the VFS* types out, > > and > > > > only use single-word type names (Ie no spaces). > > > > > > > > On the API): Obviously we getters and setters. They probably need to > > operate > > > > on uris. There probably needs to be some search functionality in here > > too > > > > since we probably shouldn't assume that the indexer and metadata server > > are > > > > the same. > > > > > > > > Tagging/Emblems: If you ask me they should be "just another type of > > > > metadata". When the metadata spec matures a bit we can evaluate if it > > needs > > > > it's own api to make things easier (and allow for dedicated tagging > > > > services). > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > First I'd like to point to the original mail I sent on this subject. > > > It already contained a relatively simple spec framework. That is, not > > > attribute names, but a way to define them, type them and check them. > > > There was also some code attached to do allow testsets to check the > > > correctness of metadata extraction from files. Hence the title of the > > > mail: 'mimetype standardization by testsets'. I still stand by this > > > idea. > > > > > > Sorry Jos, how could I miss this out. For reference - here's the original > > thread: > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/2006-October/008682.html > Ah yes, thanks for adding the link, I forgot it.
Yes, excellent. > > > > > Here is an idea for a simple proposal. > > > > > > - Each metadata type is identified by a URI. E.g. > > > > > http://www.freedesktop.org/metadata/xhtml1/title. > > > - For each URI there will be human readable descriptions in every > > > language and keywords in every language. I will use the keyword in the > > > further description mixed with the URI. > > > > > > I like this idea as such. I can't readily see how it intermixes with known > > widespread standards such as DC though..? Yes, I think this approach is good as well. My main interest is in getting proper licensing fields into this spec (I work for creative commons ;) Maybe now is not the time to throw my 2 cents into this, but this URI approach meshes well with other standards... > DC also uses URIs to identify metadata types. It does not define much > more than that though. This is too little for our needs. Within RDF > Schema it is also customary to use URIs for type identification. Agree, but how would you propose to mend this gap? Is there spec on a wiki somewhere to help hammer this out? Jon -- Jon Phillips San Francisco, CA USA PH 510.499.0894 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rejon.org MSN, AIM, Yahoo Chat: kidproto Jabber Chat: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
