W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > January 2009

Re: Media Fragment URI Syntax: 3 polls now open

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:45:01 +0100
Message-ID: <497D942D.9030509@cwi.nl>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
CC: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>, Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>

Dear Silvia,

Thank you very much for your careful review of the questionnaires !!!
See some comments inlined.

> I would be really careful about using the comma as a secondary
> separator. There are time specifications that include a comma, in
> particular the SMPTE time stamps. Any number that is larger than 1000
> is often specified as 1,000. These are the reasons why in Temporal
> URIs we did not use the comma as the secondary separator, but rather
> used the "/". I seem to have missed that discussion in Ghent and the
> agreement on the comma. If people think this situation can be avoided,
> then I'm happy to consent to the comma - it certainly feels natural.

If the comma is allowed in SMPTE time stamps value, then it will indeed 
prohibit to have this character as a secondary separator.

Silvia, could you please send to the list a reference where we can find 
the characters used by SMPTE?
All, what do you think?
We might want to open a new questionnaire for choosing the right 
character for the secondary separator, but you can already decide for 
the primary one ;-)

  > I think there is a mistake on the
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/42785/MFRAGSYNTAXRECTANGLE/ page.
> The one used by CSS is not xywh, FAIK, but is trbl - see e.g.
> http://www.css3.com/css-margin/ .
> So, I think this question has to be corrected and re-asked.

Oups, you're right, I have corrected the question.
All, please update your answers in light of this new information if you 
think it is necessary.

> According to http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt, if we are using
> quotes, it can only be single quotes. Double quotes are not allowed
> inside a fragment, FAICT. I think double quotes need to be
> percent-encoded. So, we should change the question to say
> single-quotes rather than double-quotes.

Again, well-spotted. Actually, I remember now that we had this 
discussion in Ghent, and in the syntax wiki page, we use single quotes 
for that reason ... I have updated the question, so all, please update 
your answers in light of this new information if you think it is necessary.

All, I can see from the preliminary results that there will be no 
consensus for all these questions, so be prepared for active discussion 
this Wednesday. The ones who disagree with the majority would need to 
argue their position ...
Best regards.


RaphaŽl Troncy
CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science),
Science Park 123, 1098 XG Amsterdam, The Netherlands
e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093
Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312
Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Monday, 26 January 2009 10:45:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:41 UTC