[Playlist] Re: RDF music metadata spec

[Jay Fienberg]

> On Jan 5, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Lucas Gonze wrote:
>
>> http://pingthesemanticweb.com/ontology/mo/
>>
>> We have been in need of a high-quality metadata format to incorporate
>> for quite a long time now.  Does anybody have feelings on whether  
>> this
>> effort should be a recommendation?

The Music Ontology (MO) looks like it will be a useful vocabulary for  
use with XSPF. And, it seems like they're asking back: will XSPF be  
useful to use with MO (see http://tinyurl.com/y6uxhu ).

I think MO is probably too new to be flat-out recommended, but, other  
than MusicBrainz, I don't know who else is working towards a  
comprehensive audio vocabulary. Maybe the Library of Congress will  
update theirs and make it official ( http://www.lcweb.loc.gov/rr/ 
mopic/avprot/extension2.html#audioMD ).

In any case, it'd be great for the XSPF project to recommend music- 
related data vocabularies, to suggest a larger standard for  
interoperability across "richer" media applications.

I'm starting a new "record label" and working with music-related data  
on computer through the whole composition / production /  
distribution / play "workflow." It seems natural to release all or  
most of this artist / album / track data online in usable formats,  
e.g., in XSPF with extensions from MusicBrainz and/or MO and/or other  
vocabularies like Dublin Core. And, although it wouldn't be useful  
for the music I am working with, MusicXML is an example of another  
vocabulary that also could be incorporated. iXML is another example I  
could imagine fitting in, for example, for music from live shows.

So, it'd be great for there to be some more guidelines for using  
these specific "standardized vocabulary" extensions in XSPF. (I'll  
show y'all my extended XSPF when it's ready--maybe it can inspire  
some official examples.)

RDFa (aka data in HTML) also looks like an attractive output option  
for all of this. I can imagine HTML pages that are easy to transform  
to XSPF, and also, using RDFa, incorporate MusicBrainz and other  
vocabulary compatible music data.

> From: Robert Kaye <rob at eorbit.net>

> Ironically enough, MusicBrainz is no longer recommending that people
> use this format. RDF has proven to be a significant hinderance to
> adoption because of its bizarre syntax and horrible specs. Instead,
> we're following the lead of the big guys and going with plain simple
> XML:
>
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/MusicBrainzXMLMetaData
>
> This format was created by Matthias and myself and should work well
> with XSPF. As for accessing MB metadata via REST, this has become the
> official way moving forward. RDF has now been deprecated at MB.

RDF is a great framework for data online, but RDF/XML is pretty  
awful. So, I think it's great that the MusicBrainz service will be  
accessible via a simpler XML format. But, the MusicBrainz RDF, in  
terms of it being a music data vocabulary, is still very important.  
And, you (or, someone) can always offer (via GRDDL) an XSLT transform  
to produce RDF/XML from the MusicBrainz XML.

Jay

>
>> as in:
>>> Jay Fienberg
>>>> http://jayfienberg.com
>>>
>>
>