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

Re: [mawg] RE: Discovery of track and named fragment names

From: Pierre-Antoine <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:32:31 +0100
Message-ID: <4B0B9A1F.9030602@liris.cnrs.fr>
To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
CC: "Troncy, Raphael" <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>, Davy Van Deursen <davy.vandeursen@ugent.be>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>, 'Silvia Pfeiffer' <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "public-media-fragment@w3.org" <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Hi all,

it seems like a very valid use case to me.

I think ma:fragment is a good candidate for this, even if we have to
tweak its original intent to include tracks -- which is in sync with the
Media Fragment WG, anyway...

Le 24/11/2009 09:23, Bailer, Werner a écrit :
> Dear Raphaël, 
> 
>> *Question:* Could the ma:fragments and ma:namedFragments properties be
>> used to enable track and named fragments discovery?
>>
>>> DOMString[] getTrackNames(MediaResource mr) {
>>> 	Fragment[] fragments = mr.fragments();
>>> 	DOMString[] tracknames;
>>> 	for(Fragment f : fragments) {
>>> 		If(f.role = "Track") {
>>> 			tracknames.add(f.identifier);
>>> 		}
>>> 	}
>>> 	return tracknames;
>>> }

Oh, and btw, are we planning on using roles/subproperties to filter
fragments that are actually tracks ?!? :-P
<huge_tong_in_the_cheek_please_dont_flame/>

  pa


Received on Tuesday, 24 November 2009 08:33:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 24 November 2009 08:33:13 GMT