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

Re: ACTION-76 : Question if MPEG-21 Part 17 got registered on IANA as a media mime type for fragments

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:48:37 +0200
Message-Id: <p06240862c680bfff0834@[10.228.248.1]>
To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
At 11:40  +0100 13/07/09, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
>David,
>
>>  correct, but I don't think they need to be; the fragment details are
>>  in the referenced specifications, so the fragment scheme is defined
>>  for both, in the formal sense...
>
>Frankly, I'm not totally convinced. If you compare the application/mp21
>registration with application/xhtml+xml [1] you will find that there the
>fragment identifiers semantics have been explicitly mentioned.
>
>Thoughts?

If that section is in the MIME registration but not the spec of XHTML 
1.0, I am not sure that's right, as the two documents have to be in 
sync..  If it's in both, we hope that they agree, and I'm afraid of 
overlap.

mpeg-4 and mpeg-21 chose to take the route that the mime registration 
was merely a registration, a pointer from the code point (the mime 
type) to the spec.  Is that a problem?

>
>Cheers,
>       Michael
>
>[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3236#section-3
>
>--
>Dr. Michael Hausenblas
>LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
>DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
>Ireland, Europe
>Tel. +353 91 495730
>http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
>http://sw-app.org/about.html
>
>
>
>>  From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
>>  Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:47:20 +0200
>>  To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
>>  Cc: erik mannens <erik.mannens@ugent.be>, Media Fragment
>>  <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
>>  Subject: Re: ACTION-76 : Question if MPEG-21 Part 17 got registered on  IANA
>>  as  a media mime type for fragments
>>  Resent-From: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
>>  Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:49:48 +0000
>>
>>  At 19:40  +1000 13/07/09, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>  I checked the documents - while the mime types are registered, the
>>>  proposed fragment addressing schemes are not part of those
>>>  registration documents. I think that was the point that Erik was
>>>  trying to make. If this is incorrect, please explain - maybe the
>>>  fragment addressing schemes were registered differently.
>>>
>>>  Regards,
>>>  Silvia.
>>
>>  correct, but I don't think they need to be; the fragment details are
>>  in the referenced specifications, so the fragment scheme is defined
>>  for both, in the formal sense...
>>
>>>
>>>  On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:38 PM, David Singer<singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>>>   The MPEG-21 and MPEG-4 media types are both registered, MPEG-21 recently.
>>>>
>>>>   From: "Amanda Baber via RT" <iana-mime@iana.org>
>>>>
>>>>   Date: July 8, 2009 2:22:47 AM GMT+02:00
>>>>
>>>>   Cc: christian.timmerer@itec.uni-klu.ac.at, singer@apple.com
>>>>
>>>>   Subject: [IANA #249445] Media Type Registration Reviews - 
>>>>Standards Tree/No
>>>>   Internet  Draft
>>>>
>>>>   Reply-To: iana-mime@iana.org
>>>>
>>>>   Dear Christian and David,
>>>>
>>>>   Per the IESG, IANA has registered the following media type with
>>>>   David as the point of contact:
>>>>
>>>>   application/mp21
>>>>
>>>>   Please see
>>>>
>>>>   http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/
>>>>
>>>>   If you need to update the contact information, please send a
>>>>   message to iana@iana.org.
>>>>
>>>>   Best regards,
>>>>
>>>>   Amanda Baber
>>>>   Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   At 10:34  +0200 8/07/09, erik mannens wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   Dear all,
>>>>
>>>>   As one of the MPEG-21 editors notified, they did not register 
>>>>any mime-type
>>>>   for their fragmenting scheme (as we expected). During the next phoneconf
>>>>   this action can therefore be closed.
>>>>
>>>>   Sincere greetings,
>>>>
>>>>   Erik
>>>>
>>>>   -----Original Message-----
>>>>   From: myriam [mailto:myriam.amielh@cisra.canon.com.au]
>>>>   Sent: donderdag 2 juli 2009 1:58
>>>>   To: erik mannens
>>>>   Cc: sylvain.devillers@francetelecom.com
>>>>   Subject: Re: Quick question if MPEG-21 Part 17 got registered 
>>>>on IANA as a
>>>>   media mime type for fragments
>>>>
>>>>   Dear Eric,
>>>>   no we did not propose any mime type registration.
>  >>>  feel free to contact me again should you have any questions,
>>>>   Best regards
>>>>   Myriam
>>>>
>>>>   Research Manager
>>>>   Canon Information System Research Australia
>>>>
>>>>   erik mannens wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   Dear Myriam, Sylvain,
>>>>>
>>>>>   As co-chair of W3C's Media Fragments group [1] I ask you as editors of
>>>>>   MPEG-21 Part 17 if your fragmenting scheme was ever registered as a
>>>>>   media mime type for fragments on IANA? Thanks in advance for the
>>>>>   prompt reply and have a nice day.
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sincere greetings,
>>>>>
>>>>>   Erik Mannens
>>>>>
>>>>>   Project Manager
>>>>>
>>>>>   Gaston Crommenlaan 8 bus 201
>>>>>
>>>>>   B-9050 Ledeberg-Ghent, Belgium
>>>>>
>>>>>   T: +32 9 331 49 93
>>>>>
>>>>>   F: +32 9 331 48 96
>>>>>
>>>>>   M: +32 473 27 44 17
>>>>>
>>>>>   http://multimedialab.elis.ugent.be
>>>>>
>>>>>   [1]: http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   --
>>>>
>>>>   David Singer
>>>>   Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  David Singer
>>  Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
>>


-- 
David Singer
Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Monday, 13 July 2009 10:49:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:34 GMT