[Nepomuk] OSCAF and music live and videoclips

[Sebastian Trüg]

On 04/04/2012 08:53 PM, Ignacio Serantes wrote:
> Seems like we are near our goal but I will take a short break and I will
> not available again until next Tuesday so don't expect a response by me
> until I will back home.

Same here. I will not be back until next weekend.

> If we will do some changes to ontologies I think that is a
> good opportunity to solve the issues with nmm:MusicAlbum I commented in
> other mail:
> 
>  1. Album cover
>  2. Album performer, for collaborative albums or recompilations
>  3. Total tracks per set and per box set
> 
> And other one I forgot it, the problem associated with albums with the
> same name but different artists. Actually this is a mess because only
> one resource is created.

Ah, that is bad. If we add the album artist the situation should get
better. Still not perfect as there might be several albums with the same
name and "Various Artists"... but better.

> Bye.
> 
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Andrew Lake <jamboarder at gmail.com
> <mailto:jamboarder at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Yup, double typing is exactly what I had in mind. It cuts down on a
>     proliferation of new classes and more simply reflects what actually
>     happens in the real world - resources on the users computer can be of
>     multiple types (rdf:type has no maxCardinality that I can recall).
>     Applications already have to deal with this possibility.
> 
>     The query would be simple:
>     1. If the user wants live performances of any type then use:
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:LivePerformance
>     2. If the user wants TV show live performances use:
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:LivePerformance
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:TVShow
>     3. If the user wants Music Video live performances use:
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:LivePerformance
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:MusicVideo
>     4. If the user wants Music live performances use:
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:LivePerformance
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:MusicPiece
>     5. if the user wants a concert of any type use:
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:Concert
>     6. if the user wants a concert movie use:
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:Concert
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:Movie
>     7. if the user wants a concert TV show use:
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:Concert
>        ?r rdf:type nmm:TVShow
> 
>     Even better, if nfo:Media is ever expanded to include new types such
>     as (Books, AudioBooks, Plays, Spoken Word, etc.) this live performance
>     ontology wouldn't need to be updated again.
>     I really think we can get all the benefits we need without introducing
>     media-specific live performance types.
> 
>     Hope this helps,
>     Andrew
> 
>     On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Sebastian Trüg <sebastian at trueg.de
>     <mailto:sebastian at trueg.de>> 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 <kde at aynoa.net
>     <mailto:kde at aynoa.net>> 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
>     <jamboarder at gmail.com <mailto:jamboarder at gmail.com>> 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 <kde at aynoa.net
>     <mailto:kde at aynoa.net>> 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
>     <sebastian at trueg.de <mailto:sebastian at trueg.de>>
>     >>>>> 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
> 
>