[ogg-dev] The use for an XML based metadata format
silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 14 23:53:03 PDT 2007
Let's not start finger-pointing, since that's not constructive.
I do think we have gotten further than what you are describing.
Skeleton, CMML and Vorbiscomment are not sufficient for some people -
in particular when there is a more complex piece of metadata to be
communicted, e.g. from an archive that stores a lot more information
than just name-value pairs.
But I agree: the space is complex and creating a good, generic
description scheme for e.g. music alone is hard enough, not to speak
of the complexity of a generic, but structured annotation scheme for
audio and video.
I think we are focusing now on particular aspects of the problem and
that is a lot more constructive. E.g. adding an ID to skeleton is a
good thing. Creating a automatically parsable scheme that describes
relationships between logical bitstreams is also a good thing.
If you have constructive contributions, go ahead - else, just watch.
On 9/15/07, Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves <justivo at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been trying to follow the situation here, because that's one of
> the things I try to do in Xiph: know what's happening. There's a
> total of 70 messages related with recent metadata discussions.
> Here's what I have understood so far:
> * Daniel is still not trying to read and understand the _other_
> metadata proposals; he makes several non-true statements regarding
> * Daniel wants to "stuff in" a new metadata format no matter the cost
> to backwards-compatibility; he also intends it to completely
> obliterate Vorbis Comment. All of this is highly ambitious,
> especially for someone with no actual knowledge in the field.
> * There's interest again in metadata in Ogg. This be a good thing.
> * Skeleton still seems to me to be the more advanced and logical step
> for metadata in Ogg.
> Here's my take on the issue:
> Metadata is highly overrated outside the Semantic Web. As far as I
> see, that's why nobody actually cared to support anything but Vorbis
> Comments, ID3 hacks (in MP3), and APE tags (in whatever proprietary
> format that uses that). I believe Matroska has no metadata support
> either, but I may be wrong. So, if it's for the Semantic Web, using
> W3C-based proposals are likely the best solution. After all, they are
> the ones behind the whole thing to begin with. RDF is probably too
> complicated for Ogg, though.
> I guess in the end I can't offer any decent help or advice right now,
> but I felt like writing this anyway. How does that American saying
> goes? "It felt like a good idea at the time".
> ogg-dev mailing list
> ogg-dev at xiph.org
More information about the ogg-dev