Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [newsml-g2] Processing updates of concepts

Expand Messages
  • Michael Steidl (IPTC)
    Hi Philippe good questions, hope to provide a reasonable answer: * you touch a sensitive area with having GUIDs for concept items and Concept Ids in parallel.
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 31, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Philippe
      good questions, hope to provide a reasonable answer:

      * you touch a sensitive area with having GUIDs for concept items and Concept
      Ids in parallel.
      Let's start with a broad approach: it is not mandatory that updates of
      content are delivered by items with the same GUID and different @version
      values - but *highly* recommended. Reason: we know that a couple of content
      management systems do not support versioning. Therefore this flexible
      approach opens a workaround for such systems.

      Therefore it is obvious that G2 should not demand that Concept Items about
      the same concept MUST have an identical GUID.
      So how to keep updates together:
      - option A: using <links> as the Guidelines point out
      - option B, I would call a fall back approach: the <contentModified> dates
      of Concept Items. This should allow to line up received items in
      chronological order. (Very last resort: use the versionCreated date of the
      Concept Item as it is mandatory). Btw.: using <contenModified> is the
      recommended way to signal updates for concepts in Knowledge Items. This will
      be explained in the Guidelines for the latest G2 version - should be out on
      15 February.

      Option B above could also be used for Concept Items from different providers
      - but with the same Concept Id.

      And this meets the G2 design: for concepts the relevant identifier is the
      Concept Id and Concept Items or Knowledge Items (and their GUId) are
      considered to be only wrappers for management and transportation use.

      * Bonus answer:
      If you receive that (Concept Item with the same GUID but a different Concept
      Id) this should be considered as error. At the processing level you should
      drop such an item at the business level you should talk to the provider.
      Reason: the rule for G2 versioning is that an item is about a specific piece
      of content (news, concept ...) and version are only made to reflect
      enhancement, corrections or updates of this very piece of content - but it
      is not made for replacing content. (The same type of error in the exchange
      of news could be: version 1 is a photo of Mr X, and version 2 is a photo of
      Miss Q)

      Michael


      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
      > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
      > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 1:03 PM
      > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [newsml-g2] Processing updates of concepts
      >
      > Hi,
      >
      > The implementation guide describes possible update process based on the
      > sender issuing an item with the same GUID, and optionally a new version
      > number (12.5.2 and 19.6). I'd be interested to get some clarification
      > about some variations of this, that can arise when exchanging concept
      > items.
      >
      > To give you some context, I'm developing a system that stores and
      > manages concepts (information about events, locations, etc.). I'm using
      > NewsML-G2 as a way for other systems to send me information about new
      > concepts or update of such information.
      >
      > Question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on what to
      > do when a receiver is sent a concept item with a new (i.e., never
      > received) GUID and no <link> to a previous version (as described in
      > 19.6 of imp. guide) , if the conveyed concept has a known (e.g.,
      > previously received) conceptId?
      >
      > Looks like we are in the case of multiple, independent concept items
      > conveying information/update about the same concept, right? So, can
      > the receiver interpret this as an update of the concept identified by
      > the given conceptId?
      >
      > Bonus question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on
      > what to do when a receiver gets a concept item with an existing (i.e.,
      > previously received) GUID if the conveyed concept has a conceptId
      > different from the one sent previously in a concept item with the same
      > GUID? In this case, it looks like a given concept item is re-used over
      > time to convey information about different concepts. Is that a correct
      > interpretation?
      >
      > Best,
      > Philippe Mougin
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the
      > Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at
      > http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be submitted
      > under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
    • Philippe Mougin
      Thanks for the useful answer (as usual!) Philippe Mougin
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 5 11:49 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks for the useful answer (as usual!)
        Philippe Mougin

        --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Steidl \(IPTC\)" <mdirector@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Philippe
        > good questions, hope to provide a reasonable answer:
        >
        > * you touch a sensitive area with having GUIDs for concept items and Concept
        > Ids in parallel.
        > Let's start with a broad approach: it is not mandatory that updates of
        > content are delivered by items with the same GUID and different @version
        > values - but *highly* recommended. Reason: we know that a couple of content
        > management systems do not support versioning. Therefore this flexible
        > approach opens a workaround for such systems.
        >
        > Therefore it is obvious that G2 should not demand that Concept Items about
        > the same concept MUST have an identical GUID.
        > So how to keep updates together:
        > - option A: using <links> as the Guidelines point out
        > - option B, I would call a fall back approach: the <contentModified> dates
        > of Concept Items. This should allow to line up received items in
        > chronological order. (Very last resort: use the versionCreated date of the
        > Concept Item as it is mandatory). Btw.: using <contenModified> is the
        > recommended way to signal updates for concepts in Knowledge Items. This will
        > be explained in the Guidelines for the latest G2 version - should be out on
        > 15 February.
        >
        > Option B above could also be used for Concept Items from different providers
        > - but with the same Concept Id.
        >
        > And this meets the G2 design: for concepts the relevant identifier is the
        > Concept Id and Concept Items or Knowledge Items (and their GUId) are
        > considered to be only wrappers for management and transportation use.
        >
        > * Bonus answer:
        > If you receive that (Concept Item with the same GUID but a different Concept
        > Id) this should be considered as error. At the processing level you should
        > drop such an item at the business level you should talk to the provider.
        > Reason: the rule for G2 versioning is that an item is about a specific piece
        > of content (news, concept ...) and version are only made to reflect
        > enhancement, corrections or updates of this very piece of content - but it
        > is not made for replacing content. (The same type of error in the exchange
        > of news could be: version 1 is a photo of Mr X, and version 2 is a photo of
        > Miss Q)
        >
        > Michael
        >
        >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
        > > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
        > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 1:03 PM
        > > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [newsml-g2] Processing updates of concepts
        > >
        > > Hi,
        > >
        > > The implementation guide describes possible update process based on the
        > > sender issuing an item with the same GUID, and optionally a new version
        > > number (12.5.2 and 19.6). I'd be interested to get some clarification
        > > about some variations of this, that can arise when exchanging concept
        > > items.
        > >
        > > To give you some context, I'm developing a system that stores and
        > > manages concepts (information about events, locations, etc.). I'm using
        > > NewsML-G2 as a way for other systems to send me information about new
        > > concepts or update of such information.
        > >
        > > Question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on what to
        > > do when a receiver is sent a concept item with a new (i.e., never
        > > received) GUID and no <link> to a previous version (as described in
        > > 19.6 of imp. guide) , if the conveyed concept has a known (e.g.,
        > > previously received) conceptId?
        > >
        > > Looks like we are in the case of multiple, independent concept items
        > > conveying information/update about the same concept, right? So, can
        > > the receiver interpret this as an update of the concept identified by
        > > the given conceptId?
        > >
        > > Bonus question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on
        > > what to do when a receiver gets a concept item with an existing (i.e.,
        > > previously received) GUID if the conveyed concept has a conceptId
        > > different from the one sent previously in a concept item with the same
        > > GUID? In this case, it looks like a given concept item is re-used over
        > > time to convey information about different concepts. Is that a correct
        > > interpretation?
        > >
        > > Best,
        > > Philippe Mougin
      • Philippe Mougin
        In a system which is a provider of concepts (i.e., the system sends concepts inside conceptItems to another program), I m thinking about using the concept URI
        Message 3 of 8 , Feb 10 2:50 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          In a system which is a provider of concepts (i.e., the system sends concepts inside conceptItems to another program), I'm thinking about using the concept URI as the guid of the conceptItem. That would simplify the management of those identifiers (just one instead of two to generate, store, etc.). Is that something compatible with the G2 standard? Do you see problems/disadvantages with this approach?
          Best,
          Philippe Mougin

          --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Steidl \(IPTC\)" <mdirector@...> wrote:

          > you touch a sensitive area with having GUIDs for concept items and Concept
          > Ids in parallel.

          [...]

          > And this meets the G2 design: for concepts the relevant identifier is the
          > Concept Id and Concept Items or Knowledge Items (and their GUId) are
          > considered to be only wrappers for management and transportation use.

          [...]

          > > -----Original Message-----
          > > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
          > > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
          > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 1:03 PM
          > > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
          > > Subject: [newsml-g2] Processing updates of concepts
          > >
          > > Hi,
          > >
          > > The implementation guide describes possible update process based on the
          > > sender issuing an item with the same GUID, and optionally a new version
          > > number (12.5.2 and 19.6). I'd be interested to get some clarification
          > > about some variations of this, that can arise when exchanging concept
          > > items.
          > >
          > > To give you some context, I'm developing a system that stores and
          > > manages concepts (information about events, locations, etc.). I'm using
          > > NewsML-G2 as a way for other systems to send me information about new
          > > concepts or update of such information.
          > >
          > > Question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on what to
          > > do when a receiver is sent a concept item with a new (i.e., never
          > > received) GUID and no <link> to a previous version (as described in
          > > 19.6 of imp. guide) , if the conveyed concept has a known (e.g.,
          > > previously received) conceptId?
          > >
          > > Looks like we are in the case of multiple, independent concept items
          > > conveying information/update about the same concept, right? So, can
          > > the receiver interpret this as an update of the concept identified by
          > > the given conceptId?
          > >
          > > Bonus question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on
          > > what to do when a receiver gets a concept item with an existing (i.e.,
          > > previously received) GUID if the conveyed concept has a conceptId
          > > different from the one sent previously in a concept item with the same
          > > GUID? In this case, it looks like a given concept item is re-used over
          > > time to convey information about different concepts. Is that a correct
          > > interpretation?
          > >
          > > Best,
          > > Philippe Mougin
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ------------------------------------
          > >
          > > Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the
          > > Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at
          > > http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be submitted
          > > under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
          > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
        • Michael Steidl (IPTC)
          Philippe, interesting approach (as always ;-) a) at the design level: yes this should work as both the GUID and the Concept Id should be a globally unique
          Message 4 of 8 , Feb 13 11:38 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Philippe,
            interesting approach (as always ;-)

            a) at the design level: yes this should work as both the GUID and the
            Concept Id should be a globally unique identifier.
            b) further the @guid attribute of an item's root element does not require a
            specific format.
            c) practical view:
            - Concept Ids must align to the design of QCodes: a code in a vocabulary,
            the vocabulary is identified by a URI, and the URI is shortened by an alias:
            Let's assume as example:
            Vocabulary (= Scheme) URI: http://eventprovider.com/events/
            Alias: myevent
            Code for a specific Concept / Event: e9911
            Concept Id as URI: http://eventprovider.com/events/e9911
            Concept Id as QCode: myevent:e9911
            As @guid of a <conceptItem>: <conceptItem
            guid="http://eventprovider.com/events/e9911" .... />

            So you only have to be careful *not* to use the QCode of the Concept Id in
            the @guid but the full Concept URI. Reason: the @guid attribute's data type
            is xs:string and not QCodeType, thus a receiving processor would not know
            that it should resolve the string being a QCode to a Concept URI which is
            the real identifier.

            Regards,
            Michael


            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
            > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
            > Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 11:51 AM
            > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [newsml-g2] Re: Processing updates of concepts
            >
            > In a system which is a provider of concepts (i.e., the system sends
            > concepts inside conceptItems to another program), I'm thinking about
            > using the concept URI as the guid of the conceptItem. That would
            > simplify the management of those identifiers (just one instead of two
            > to generate, store, etc.). Is that something compatible with the G2
            > standard? Do you see problems/disadvantages with this approach?
            > Best,
            > Philippe Mougin
            >
            > --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Steidl \(IPTC\)"
            > <mdirector@...> wrote:
            >
            > > you touch a sensitive area with having GUIDs for concept items and
            > Concept
            > > Ids in parallel.
            >
            > [...]
            >
            > > And this meets the G2 design: for concepts the relevant identifier is
            > the
            > > Concept Id and Concept Items or Knowledge Items (and their GUId) are
            > > considered to be only wrappers for management and transportation use.
            >
            > [...]
            >
            > > > -----Original Message-----
            > > > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com]
            > On
            > > > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
            > > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 1:03 PM
            > > > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
            > > > Subject: [newsml-g2] Processing updates of concepts
            > > >
            > > > Hi,
            > > >
            > > > The implementation guide describes possible update process based on
            > the
            > > > sender issuing an item with the same GUID, and optionally a new
            > version
            > > > number (12.5.2 and 19.6). I'd be interested to get some
            > clarification
            > > > about some variations of this, that can arise when exchanging
            > concept
            > > > items.
            > > >
            > > > To give you some context, I'm developing a system that stores and
            > > > manages concepts (information about events, locations, etc.). I'm
            > using
            > > > NewsML-G2 as a way for other systems to send me information about
            > new
            > > > concepts or update of such information.
            > > >
            > > > Question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on what
            > to
            > > > do when a receiver is sent a concept item with a new (i.e., never
            > > > received) GUID and no <link> to a previous version (as described in
            > > > 19.6 of imp. guide) , if the conveyed concept has a known (e.g.,
            > > > previously received) conceptId?
            > > >
            > > > Looks like we are in the case of multiple, independent concept
            > items
            > > > conveying information/update about the same concept, right? So,
            > can
            > > > the receiver interpret this as an update of the concept identified
            > by
            > > > the given conceptId?
            > > >
            > > > Bonus question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on
            > > > what to do when a receiver gets a concept item with an existing
            > (i.e.,
            > > > previously received) GUID if the conveyed concept has a conceptId
            > > > different from the one sent previously in a concept item with the
            > same
            > > > GUID? In this case, it looks like a given concept item is re-used
            > over
            > > > time to convey information about different concepts. Is that a
            > correct
            > > > interpretation?
            > > >
            > > > Best,
            > > > Philippe Mougin
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > ------------------------------------
            > > >
            > > > Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the
            > > > Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at
            > > > http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be
            > submitted
            > > > under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
            > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the
            > Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at
            > http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be submitted
            > under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
          • Philippe Mougin
            Perfect. Exactly what I had in mind. Thanks, Philippe Mougin
            Message 5 of 8 , Feb 14 1:16 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Perfect. Exactly what I had in mind.
              Thanks,
              Philippe Mougin

              --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Steidl \(IPTC\)" <mdirector@...> wrote:
              >
              > Philippe,
              > interesting approach (as always ;-)
              >
              > a) at the design level: yes this should work as both the GUID and the
              > Concept Id should be a globally unique identifier.
              > b) further the @guid attribute of an item's root element does not require a
              > specific format.
              > c) practical view:
              > - Concept Ids must align to the design of QCodes: a code in a vocabulary,
              > the vocabulary is identified by a URI, and the URI is shortened by an alias:
              > Let's assume as example:
              > Vocabulary (= Scheme) URI: http://eventprovider.com/events/
              > Alias: myevent
              > Code for a specific Concept / Event: e9911
              > Concept Id as URI: http://eventprovider.com/events/e9911
              > Concept Id as QCode: myevent:e9911
              > As @guid of a <conceptItem>: <conceptItem
              > guid="http://eventprovider.com/events/e9911" .... />
              >
              > So you only have to be careful *not* to use the QCode of the Concept Id in
              > the @guid but the full Concept URI. Reason: the @guid attribute's data type
              > is xs:string and not QCodeType, thus a receiving processor would not know
              > that it should resolve the string being a QCode to a Concept URI which is
              > the real identifier.
              >
              > Regards,
              > Michael
              >
              >
              > > -----Original Message-----
              > > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
              > > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
              > > Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 11:51 AM
              > > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
              > > Subject: [newsml-g2] Re: Processing updates of concepts
              > >
              > > In a system which is a provider of concepts (i.e., the system sends
              > > concepts inside conceptItems to another program), I'm thinking about
              > > using the concept URI as the guid of the conceptItem. That would
              > > simplify the management of those identifiers (just one instead of two
              > > to generate, store, etc.). Is that something compatible with the G2
              > > standard? Do you see problems/disadvantages with this approach?
              > > Best,
              > > Philippe Mougin
              > >
              > > --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Steidl \(IPTC\)"
              > > <mdirector@> wrote:
              > >
              > > > you touch a sensitive area with having GUIDs for concept items and
              > > Concept
              > > > Ids in parallel.
              > >
              > > [...]
              > >
              > > > And this meets the G2 design: for concepts the relevant identifier is
              > > the
              > > > Concept Id and Concept Items or Knowledge Items (and their GUId) are
              > > > considered to be only wrappers for management and transportation use.
              > >
              > > [...]
              > >
              > > > > -----Original Message-----
              > > > > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com]
              > > On
              > > > > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
              > > > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 1:03 PM
              > > > > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
              > > > > Subject: [newsml-g2] Processing updates of concepts
              > > > >
              > > > > Hi,
              > > > >
              > > > > The implementation guide describes possible update process based on
              > > the
              > > > > sender issuing an item with the same GUID, and optionally a new
              > > version
              > > > > number (12.5.2 and 19.6). I'd be interested to get some
              > > clarification
              > > > > about some variations of this, that can arise when exchanging
              > > concept
              > > > > items.
              > > > >
              > > > > To give you some context, I'm developing a system that stores and
              > > > > manages concepts (information about events, locations, etc.). I'm
              > > using
              > > > > NewsML-G2 as a way for other systems to send me information about
              > > new
              > > > > concepts or update of such information.
              > > > >
              > > > > Question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on what
              > > to
              > > > > do when a receiver is sent a concept item with a new (i.e., never
              > > > > received) GUID and no <link> to a previous version (as described in
              > > > > 19.6 of imp. guide) , if the conveyed concept has a known (e.g.,
              > > > > previously received) conceptId?
              > > > >
              > > > > Looks like we are in the case of multiple, independent concept
              > > items
              > > > > conveying information/update about the same concept, right? So,
              > > can
              > > > > the receiver interpret this as an update of the concept identified
              > > by
              > > > > the given conceptId?
              > > > >
              > > > > Bonus question: does the standard specify or provides guidelines on
              > > > > what to do when a receiver gets a concept item with an existing
              > > (i.e.,
              > > > > previously received) GUID if the conveyed concept has a conceptId
              > > > > different from the one sent previously in a concept item with the
              > > same
              > > > > GUID? In this case, it looks like a given concept item is re-used
              > > over
              > > > > time to convey information about different concepts. Is that a
              > > correct
              > > > > interpretation?
              > > > >
              > > > > Best,
              > > > > Philippe Mougin
            • John Evans
              Hi all, I notice that the duration property for an audio/video newsItem is stored in the remotecontent element, implying that it could vary over different
              Message 6 of 8 , Feb 14 1:34 AM
              • 0 Attachment

                Hi all,

                I notice that the duration property for an audio/video newsItem is stored in the remotecontent element, implying that it could vary over different renditions.

                 

                Can anyone suggest an example where this might be the case, or should it be moved to the itemmeta section?

                 

                Kind regards

                 

                John Evans
                Managing Director
                Transtel Communications ltd
                www.Transtel.com

                44 (0)1451 812251

                 

              • Michael Steidl (IPTC)
                John To clarify the reason for having a @duration: it is also available as attribute of inlineData and inlineXML. Conclusion: the attribute is made to provide
                Message 7 of 8 , Feb 14 2:38 AM
                • 0 Attachment

                  John

                  To clarify the reason for having a @duration: it is also available as attribute of inlineData and inlineXML. Conclusion: the attribute is made to provide the duration of the content in general. And the general used case would be: the duration of different renditions is the same.

                   

                  Having this as background it makes sense to find out if there are use cases for which different durations are required – overruling the generic assumption.

                   

                  Michael

                   

                  From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Evans
                  Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 10:34 AM
                  To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [newsml-g2] duration property [Scanned]

                   




                  Hi all,

                  I notice that the duration property for an audio/video newsItem is stored in the remotecontent element, implying that it could vary over different renditions.

                   

                  Can anyone suggest an example where this might be the case, or should it be moved to the itemmeta section?

                   

                  Kind regards

                   

                  John Evans
                  Managing Director
                  Transtel Communications ltd
                  www.Transtel.com

                  44 (0)1451 812251

                   




                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.