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

LC Comment -2395 on Media API spec

From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 18:58:50 +0200
Message-ID: <4CB3424A.8090507@w3.org>
To: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Any toughts on James's proposal below ?
Please respond on the mailing list if you do and we will add it to the 
MAWG agenda for tomorrow.


Dear Thierry,

Thank you also for your second reply below.  There seem to be many
details for video formats in the Media API spec, but all the audio
format parameters seem to assume that audio will be accessed in PCM
format such as audio/L16.  If that is the intention, then I would ask
only that the PCM sample size (e.g., 16 bits) be included as a
parameter along with the sampling rate.  Is that acceptable?

Best regards,
James Salsman

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote:
 > Dear  James,
 > The Media Annotations Working Group has reviewed the comments you 
sent [1]
 > on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the API for Media Resource 1.0
 > published on 08 June 2010.
 > Thank you for having taken the time to review the document and to send us
 > comments.
 > The Working Group's response to your comment is included below.
 > Please review it carefully and *let us know by email at
 > public-media-annotation@w3.org if you agree with it or not*
 > before [09-Oct-2010].
 > In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific solution
 > for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group.
 > If such a consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the 
opportunity to
 > raise a formal objection which will
 > then be reviewed by the Director during the transition of this 
document to
 > the next stage in the W3C Recommendation Track.
 > Thanks,
 > For the Media Annotations Working Group,
 > Thierry Michel,
 > W3C Team Contact
 > 1.
 > 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20100608
 > -----------------------
 > Resolution of the MAWG:
 > -----------------------
 > About your first issue to include audio/x-speex, please refer to our
 > previous response to your comment about speex and vp8 for the media 
 > specification.
 > - Speex is a free audio codec for Free Speech, not a multimedia *metadata
 > formats*.
 > We don't plan to introduce quality parameter as we want to keep a simple
 > list of technical properties.
 > To respond to your second issue about section 3.12.5 Samplingrate 
 > The API doc states "no exceptions" at a number of places (for the 
 > and also for some attributes, which is the case for the 
samplingRate). The
 > "no exceptions" means that no exceptions are defined when accessing this
 > attribute. The actual text "no exceptions" in the API doc is generated
 > automatically based on the Web IDL descriptions. Since no exceptions are
 > defined on the attributes in our case, this text appears in the document.
 > Note that Web IDL does allow to define exceptions for access of certain
 > properties (e.g., due to type casting), however we do not include these.
 > The API specification does not currently hold a good description of 
why we
 > do not include exceptions however. Therefore we will add a statement to
 > clarify it.
Received on Monday, 11 October 2010 16:59:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:39 UTC