Integration of Existing Multimedia Metadata Formats and Metadata Standards in the M3O

  • Daniel Eißing
  • Ansgar Scherp
  • Carsten Saathoff
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6725)

Abstract

With the Multimedia Metadata Ontology (M3O), we have developed a sophisticated model for representing among others the annotation, decomposition, and provenance of multimedia metadata. The goal of the M3O is to integrate existing metadata standards and metadata formats rather than replacing them. To this end, the M3O provides a scaffold needed to represent multimedia metadata. Being an abstract model for multimedia metadata, it is not straightforward how to use and specialize the M3O for concrete application requirements and existing metadata formats and metadata standards.

In this paper, we present a step-by-step alignment method describing how to integrate and leverage existing multimedia metadata standards and metadata formats in the M3O in order to use them in a concrete application. We demonstrate our approach by integrating three existing metadata models: the Core Ontology on Multimedia (COMM), which is a formalization of the multimedia metadata standard MPEG-7, the Ontology for Media Resource of the W3C, and the widely known industry standard EXIF for image metadata.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hunter, J.: Enhancing the semantic interoperability of multimedia through a core ontology. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 13(1), 49–58 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arndt, R., Troncy, R., Staab, S., Hardman, L., Vacura, M.: COMM: designing a well-founded multimedia ontology for the web. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.-S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.-I., Nixon, L.J.B., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 30–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Markkula, M., Sormunen, E.: End-user searching challenges indexing practices in the digital newspaper photo archive. Information Retrieval 1(4) (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hollink, L., Schreiber, A.T., Wielinga, B.J., Worring, M.: Classification of user image descriptions. International J. of Human-Computer Studies 61(5), 601–626 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hollink, L., Schreiber, G., Wielinga, B.: Patterns of semantic relations to improve image content search. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 5(3) (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association: Exchangeable image file format for digital still cameras: Exif version 2.2 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Adobe Systems, Inc.: XMP Specifications (2008), http://www.adobe.com/devnet/xmp/
  8. 8.
    International Press Telecommunications Council: “IPTC Core” Schema for XMP Version 1.0 Specification document (2005), http://www.iptc.org/
  9. 9.
    MPEG-7: Multimedia content description interface. Technical report, Standard No. ISO/IEC n15938 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dublin Core Metadata Initiative: DCMI Metadata Terms (2008), http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/
  11. 11.
    Hardman, L., Obrenovic, Z., Nack, F., Kerhervé, B., Piersol, K.W.: Canonical processes of semantically annotated media production, vol. 14(6), pp. 327–340 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saathoff, C., Scherp, A.: Unlocking the semantics of multimedia presentations in the web with the multimedia metadata ontology. In: WWW 2010, pp. 831–840. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    W3C: Ontology for media resource 1.0 (2010), http://www.w3.org/TR/mediaont-10/
  14. 14.
    Borgo, S., Masolo, C.: Foundational choices in DOLCE. In: Handbook on Ontologies, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Biron, P.V., Malhotra, A.: XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition, W3C Recommendation (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/
  17. 17.
    Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology matching. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ehrig, M.: Ontology Alignment: Bridging the Semantic Gap. Semantic Web and Beyond, vol. 4. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blomqvist, E.: Ontocase-automatic ontology enrichment based on ontology design patterns. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 65–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fowler, M., Beck, K., Brant, J., Opdyke, W., Roberts, D.: Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code. Addison Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kanzaki, M.: Exif vocabulary workspace - rdf schema (2003), http://www.w3.org/2003/12/exif/ (last update in 2007)
  22. 22.
    Brickley, D.: Basic Geo (WGS84 lat/long) Vocabulary (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boll, S., Bürger, T., Celma, O., Halaschek-Wiener, C., Mannens, E., Troncy, R.: Multimedia Vocabularies on the Semantic Web (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Media Annotations Working Group, http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/
  25. 25.
    The Metadata Working Group, http://www.metadataworkinggroup.org/
  26. 26.
    Dasiopoulou, S., Tzouvaras, V., Kompatsiaris, I., Strintzis, M.G.: Enquiring MPEG-7 based multimedia ontologies, pp. 331–370 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Eißing
    • 1
  • Ansgar Scherp
    • 1
  • Carsten Saathoff
    • 1
  1. 1.WeST, University of Koblenz-LandauGermany

Personalised recommendations