[Nepomuk] OSCAF and music live and videoclips

[Sebastian Trüg]

the advantage of the 5 classes is that no double-typing is needed. Thus,
usage is simpler and more convenient. Also imho it is cleaner. From a
usage point of view I see no problem in the additional classes.

On 04/04/2012 09:10 PM, Andrew Lake wrote:
> I'm sorry Sebastian. I was clumsy in my response.
> 
> Your latest  proposal, as I understand it, includes five additional
> clases - nmm:LiveMusicPerformance, nmm:LiveMusicPiece,
> nmm:LiveMusicVideo, nmm:ConcertVideo and nmm:MusicVideoVideo.
> 
> With nmm:LivePerformance, nmm:Concert and nmm:MusicVideo, along with
> multiple-typing, all the benefits I can think of that those five
> additional classes provide would be satisfied with just these three
> classes.  The example queries I provided was meant to support that
> assertion (at least in part).  The point being that I thought the five
> classes might not be needed.
> 
> Hope this helps,
> Andrew
> 
> Sebastian Trug wrote:
>> you did not really comment on my proposal though...
>>
>> On 04/04/2012 08:20 PM, Andrew Lake 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>
>>> 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>
>>>>> 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>
>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>> 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
>>
>>
>