In discussion on #3 , we decided that it made sense to separate the "government authority audience classification" type rating (e.g. "MPAA PG-13") from the "user review" type of rating (e.g. "Rotten Tomatoes gives this movie 98%").
Michael explained that the original design was meant to cover both types of review - and the idea was that the "Rating Source Link" could be used to distinguish between the two types.
But the group now feels that this is too confusing, and makes it difficult to map to other standards which use two separate fields for the two types of ratings.
So looking at the relevant fields, here is what we think we would like to do:
Change the existing "rating" field to cover only MPAA-style audience ratings. schema.org calls this contentRating.
Current Rating property definition:
Property Group
Property Name
Definition / Semantics
User Notes
Change Notes
Basic Type/Cardinality
EBUcore Property
XMP Property
administrative
Rating
How the video is rated by a public source or an authority
New 1.0
Rating structure (0..unbounded)
rating/ratingValue or rating/ratingLink where rating is explicitly described like a web reference
Iptc4xmpExt:Rating
Proposed new rating definition:
Property Group
Property Name
Definition / Semantics
User Notes
Change Notes
Basic Type/Cardinality
EBUcore Property
XMP Property
administrative
Rating
How the video is classified by a public authority such as MPA
Changed 1.4
Rating structure (0..unbounded)
audienceRating
Iptc4xmpExt:Rating
To cover the "newspaper review" angle of "we give this movie 4 out of 5 stars", we can use a Review property.
So we propose a new property:
Property Group
Property Name
Definition / Semantics
User Notes
Change Notes
Basic Type/Cardinality
EBUcore Property
XMP Property
administrative
Review rating
An aesthetic rating given to the video by an external reviewer such as a news outlet
New 1.4
Rating structure (0..unbounded)
rating/ratingValue or rating/ratingLink where rating is explicitly described like a web reference
Iptc4xmpExt:Review
A third use case is the original use of xmp:Rating which was adopted into Photo Metadata Standard as Image Rating, which is usually used internally to a system to track good shots within a series, as part of a photo edit workflow. This could also be called "Star Rating" or even "Workflow Rating".
So we propose a new property:
Property Group
Property Name
Definition / Semantics
User Notes
Change Notes
Basic Type/Cardinality
EBUcore Property
XMP Property
administrative
Workflow rating
An aesthetic rating given to the video by its creator, for example to mark the best take of a series
New 1.4
Rating structure (0..unbounded)
rating
xmp:Rating
Rating structure:
The rating structure can be used by all three of these properties, but not all of the properties apply in each case. The same happens in schema.org and EBUCore.
Therefore we don't need to update the rating structure.
Property Group
Property Name
Definition / Semantics
User Notes
Change Notes
Basic Type/Cardinality
EBUcore Property
XMP Property
Rating Value
Rating value as issued by the rating source
rating/ratingValue
Iptc4xmpExt:RatingValue
ratingValue
VMD <--> NMLG2: PROPERTY/@value
RatingValue
Rating Source Link
Link to the site and optionally the page of the party which has issued the rating value, linked resource should explain the rating rules.
rating/ratingLink
Iptc4xmpExt:RatingSourceLink
ratingSourceLink
VMD <--> NMLG2: PROPERTY/@ratingtypeuri
RatingSourceLink
Rating Scale Min Value
The value of the rating scale used for the lowest/worst rating
rating/ratingScaleMinValue
Iptc4xmpExt:RatingScaleMinValue
ratingScaleMinValue
VMD <--> NMLG2: PROPERTY/@scalemin
RatingScaleMinValue
Rating Scale Max Value
The value of the rating scale used for the highest/best rating
rating/ratingScaleMaxValue
Iptc4xmpExt:RatingScaleMaxValue
ratingScaleMaxValue
VMD <--> NMLG2: PROPERTY/@scalemax
RatingScaleMaxValue
Rating Value Logo
Visualisation of the rating value referenced by a link
In discussion on #3 , we decided that it made sense to separate the "government authority audience classification" type rating (e.g. "MPAA PG-13") from the "user review" type of rating (e.g. "Rotten Tomatoes gives this movie 98%").
Michael explained that the original design was meant to cover both types of review - and the idea was that the "Rating Source Link" could be used to distinguish between the two types.
But the group now feels that this is too confusing, and makes it difficult to map to other standards which use two separate fields for the two types of ratings.
For example, schema.org uses https://schema.org/Review for the "I give it 5 stars" type of rating, and https://schema.org/Rating for the government classification scheme.
So looking at the relevant fields, here is what we think we would like to do:
Current Rating property definition:
So we propose a new property:
So we propose a new property:
Rating structure:
The rating structure can be used by all three of these properties, but not all of the properties apply in each case. The same happens in schema.org and EBUCore.
Therefore we don't need to update the rating structure.