W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > May 2009

RE: Properties for media fragment?

From: Bailer, Werner <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 09:50:50 +0200
To: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD9846F872C7874BB4E0FDF2A61EF09F155C3E8F6A@RZJC1EX.jr1.local>
Dear Felix, David,

In my opinion there are two aspects related to fragments:

1. defining the range of possible values for the different types of fragments
-- for spatial and temporal fragments, this is already defined by frame width/height and duration
-- for track fragments this would require describing the list/type of channels (I mentioned that in my "wish list" for technical metadata)
-- for named fragments this would be the list of labels 

This will allow to specify valid fragment identifiers and to use them to request annotations (the returned set might of course be empty).

2. a list of fragments that are interesting, annotated, ... 
IMO this is similar to the cue ranges David mentioned, however, using media fragment URI syntax it would essentially be a list of fragment identifiers, independent of the type of fragment.
 
Best regards,
Werner

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Felix Sasaki
> Sent: Samstag, 02. Mai 2009 07:15
> To: David Singer
> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Properties for media fragment?
> 
> 
> 
> 2009/5/1 David Singer <singer@apple.com>
> 
> 
> 	At 11:06  +0200 1/05/09, Felix Sasaki wrote:
> 
> 		Hi all,
> 		
> 		I had a look at the very impressive working 
> draft of the media fragments wg. This section
> 		
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-media-frags-reqs-20090430/#MediaF
ragmentApproaches <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-media-frags-> reqs-20090430/#MediaFragmentApproaches> 
> 		made me think whether we could benefit from two 
> properties
> 		spatialMediaFragment
> 		temporalMediaFragment
> 		and potentially
> 		namedMediaFragment
> 		the mappings are already in the section cited 
> above, inclding the potential return types for the API.
> 
> 
> 	are these annotations or requests?  I have a harder 
> time seeing them as annotations.
> 
> 
> List of my favorite scences of a video, as part of the video 
> metadata? Does that not make sense?
> 
> Felix
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 	But I do see a declarative syntax for 'cue ranges' as a 
> possible desirable candidate.
> 	<http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#cue-ranges>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 		Comments?
> 		
> 		Felix
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 	-- 
> 	
> 	David Singer
> 	Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 4 May 2009 07:52:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 May 2009 07:52:15 GMT