Message-Id: <200011122012.NAA07424@dns.ccit.arizona.edu> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:09:15 +1300 From: David Adams <mailto:David.Adams@NATLIB.GOVT.NZ> Subject: Re: Fwd: image description as metadata To: mailto:IMAGELIB@LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
<pre>
This publication may be of help:
"Metadata for Digital Images - DIG35 Specification" August 2000 - Digital Imaging Group Inc.
see
www.digitalimaging.org
>>> mailto:KKraus27@AOL.COM 11/13/00 03:48 >>>
--part1_80.2c24c8b.274007a8_boundary
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="part1_80.2c24c8b.274007a8_alt_boundary"
--part1_80.2c24c8b.274007a8_alt_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
My previous email contained some annoying formatting codes (my apologies: I
had pasted in some text from a Word document) so I'm resending what I hope is
a more legible version.
Many thanks,
Kari Kraus
--part1_80.2c24c8b.274007a8_alt_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT SIZE=2>My previous email contained some annoying formatting codes (my apologies: I <BR>had pasted in some t
xt from a Word document) so I'm resending what I hope is <BR>a more legible version.
<BR>
<BR>Many thanks,
<BR>
<BR>Kari Kraus</FONT></HTML>
--part1_80.2c24c8b.274007a8_alt_boundary--
--part1_80.2c24c8b.274007a8_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Return-path: <mailto:KKraus27@aol.com>
From: mailto:KKraus27@aol.com
Full-name: KKraus27
Message-ID: <mailto:26.d369348.274006b2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 09:44:02 EST
Subject: Re: image description as metadata
To: mailto:KKraus27@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_80.2c24c8b.274006b2_boundary"
Content-Disposition: Inline
X-Mailer: Unknown sub 171
--part2_80.2c24c8b.274006b2_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> I'm hoping someone on the list can point me to a study or two on image
> description as metadata. My sense is that while controlled vocabularies are
> a favorite talking point among information managers, the free-text
> descriptions that often accompany visual objects in a database haven't been
> subjected to the same kind of scrutiny. A representative example that to my
> mind underscores the need for more conversation:
>
> In its recently published guidelines on metadata, the Digital Imaging Group
> (comprised of representatives from Kodak, Canon, Hewlett-Packard,and Fuji,
> among a host of others) had this to say: "once an image is retrieved, some
> data that describes the image but is not useful when searching may be
> included. For example 'Craig is the guy asleep on the
> lounge' is not all that useful when searching, but is useful when
> describing the content.
>
> Now it is not my intention to impugn the recommendations set forth in this
> ambitious document (a milestone achievement that attempts to establish
> much-needed jurisdiction over the largely makeshift world of metadata
> production; its discussion on image capture metadata, for example, is
> admirably comprehensive and authoritative), but the tautology underlying
> this
> quotation (keywords in first sentence: "describes . . . useful . . .
> searching"; keywords in second sentence: "useful . . . searching . . .
> describing") does little to help clarify the nature of the interface
> between these respective data fields.
>
> Any thoughts on how to define the relationship between descriptive and more
> strictly classificatory categories of information? Is there a theoretical
> body of literature in place that looks at the challenge of describing
> images?
> A set of guidelines or recommendations? Any suggestions would be greatly
> appreciated.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Kari Kraus
> University of Rochester
> mailto:kkru@mail.rochester.edu
> mailto:kkraus27@aol.com
>
>
--part2_80.2c24c8b.274006b2_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT SIZE=2>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"
I'm hoping someone on the list can point me to a study or two on image
<BR>description as metadata. My sense is that while controlled vocabularies are
<BR>a favorite talking point among information managers, the free-text
<BR>descriptions that often accompany visual objects in a database haven't been
<BR>subjected to the same kind of scrutiny. A representative example that to my
<BR>mind underscores the need for more conversation:
<BR>
<BR>In its recently published guidelines on metadata, the Digital Imaging Group
<BR>(comprised of representatives from Kodak, Canon, Hewlett-Packard,and Fuji,
<BR>among a host of others) had this to say: "once an image is retrieved, some
<BR>data that describes the image but is not useful when searching may be
<BR>included. For example 'Craig is the guy asleep on the
<BR>lounge' is not all that useful when searching, but is useful when <BR>describing the content.
<BR>
<BR>Now it is not my intention to impugn the recommendations set forth in this
<BR>ambitious document (a milestone achievement that attempts to establish
<BR>much-needed jurisdiction over the largely makeshift world of metadata
<BR>production; its discussion on image capture metadata, for example, is
<BR>admirably comprehensive and authoritative), but the tautology underlying <BR>this
<BR>quotation (keywords in first sentence: "describes . . . useful . . .
<BR>searching"; keywords in second sentence: "useful . . . searching . . .
<BR>describing") does little to help clarify the nature of the interface
<BR>between these respective data fields.
<BR>
<BR>Any thoughts on how to define the relationship between descriptive and more
<BR>strictly classificatory categories of information? Is there a theoretical
<BR>body of literature in place that looks at the challenge of describing <BR>images?
<BR>A set of guidelines or recommendations? Any suggestions would be greatly
<BR>appreciated.
<BR>
<BR>Best wishes,
<BR>
<BR>Kari Kraus
<BR>University of Rochester
<BR>mailto:kkru@mail.rochester.edu
<BR>mailto:kkraus27@aol.com
<BR>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>
--part2_80.2c24c8b.274006b2_boundary--
--part1_80.2c24c8b.274007a8_boundary--
</pre>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Nov 12 2000 - 14:14:15 CST