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

Re: Properties for media fragment?

From: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 23:22:31 +0900
Message-ID: <ba4134970905040722i3021ef16i2f3d74c0cf996f1b@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Thanks, Werner, I agree with your description. IMO "1" is provided by the
media fragements WD, see the section I cited, and "2" is to have a property
like ma:fragID which has as a value
a piece of media fragment URI syntax.

Felix

2009/5/4 Bailer, Werner <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>

> 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 14:23:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 May 2009 14:23:12 GMT