W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > March 2010

Re: Update API document

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:25:00 +1100
Message-ID: <2c0e02831003031225q3bb63e15q7ccdaf4159c73a3d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
Cc: "Chris.Poppe@ugent.be" <Chris.Poppe@ugent.be>, Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>, "???" <wslee@etri.re.kr>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Bailer, Werner
<werner.bailer@joanneum.at> wrote:
> Dear Chris, all,
>
>> @Felix,
>> I guess the request could look something like this (I have no idea
>> about the proper syntax so it's just to give you an idea):
>> Request: http://example.com/my-media-resource/getProperty?ma-
>> name=x&?ma-source=y&?ma-subtype=z&?ma-language=s&?ma-fragment=t
>
> I think the base URL would be that of the service and not of the media resource (as the media resource or metadata source might be remote), thus it will be necessary to have a way of setting context as Chris has mentioned earlier. This could be either one of the parameters, that passes an (encoded) URI of the media resource and/or metadata source.
>

I would agree - I would have thought the URL to request information
would look more like this:

http://example.com/video?getProperties={ma-name,ma-source,ma-subtype,ma-language,ma-fragment}

And the returned file would be a json or xml or some other format that
is typically used online to reply to a Web service.

Incidentally - I don't think the above URL should have the query
character ("?") repeated all through it.

Regards,
Silvia.
Received on Wednesday, 3 March 2010 20:25:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 3 March 2010 20:25:53 GMT