At 01:28 PM 5/13/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Meanwhile, we practice
>watchful waiting, knowing that our implementation of MPEG7 capabilities
>will follow the availability of tools and the implementation of MPEG7 by
>others. It is also possible that our implementation may still involve
>METS: will we wish to wrap some new MPEG7-associated video content in a
>METS wrapper? Perhaps so.
This is certainly our plan, if MPEG-7 content manifests itself. I see METS
a role with respect to MPEG-7 content similar to that it can play for TEI.
TEI gives scholars the highly complex structural metadata they need for their
work; METS provides a much lighter-weight 'bridge' for linking TEI
of a document to other representations (page image, audio files, etc.). METS
can serve the same role for MPEG-7, providing a wrapper around the content
and allowing its association with descriptive/administrative metadata and other
>MPEG21. This proposed standard is actually more interesting to us than
>MPEG7, since it is concerned with "packaging" content. I have heard it
>described as "like a shipping manifest, it tells you what is in the
>box." This functionality is rather like that of METS. And packaging is
>especially interesting for preservation planning since it is a central
>concept in the OAIS reference model for a digital repository.
MPEG 21 has a variety of parts; it does indeed including a 'packaging'
language, the DIDL, which is similar to METS' structural features, although
obviously with additions necessary to make it a viable commercial language
(ability to specify payments needed to access content identified in the
manifest, etc.). The rights language components of the standard are of
some concern to me personally, as I don't think the needs of librarians
are going to be a particular concern of the MPEG working group.
>We have not managed to sort through the SMPTE metadata, partly for lack of
>knowledgeable analysts. We also have the impression that the SMPTE data
>set is deeply concerned with the minutiae of the interior structure of a
>bitstream, with content makers and broadcasters in mind. It also appears
>to be an everything-in-one-bucket schema, unlike the AES examples. For
>now, we don't quite know what (or how) to do something with the SMPTE
>metadata. But I have the feeling that we should learn and work more
>closely with the society, perhaps to try to find a middle ground for
>archivists. For now, our video schema is the result of a hurry-up best
The METS initiative is considering trying to set up a working group to
look at video technical metadata issues, to advance the work LC has
already done. More details on this when I dig myself out of my e-mail
hole, but we'll probably try to organize a face-to-face meeting to discuss
this some time in the next few months.
Digital Library Development Team Leader
Elmer Bobst Library, New York University
70 Washington Square South, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10012
[log in to unmask]