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

Re: feedback on use cases and requirements

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:08:23 +1000
Message-ID: <2c0e02830907260608p7a34752eu7ec933f76fc400a1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Something else that I totally forgot to mention: we need to add an
absolute time specification that contains day and year to our
specifications, similar to what RTSP does:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2326.txt (section 3.7).


On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Silvia
Pfeiffer<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have had some discussions with a company that provides live
> streaming solutions about our media fragment addressing approaches.
> They are keen to make use of the specification for certain use cases
> that they are after.
> 1. A first use case that was provided is the following:
> A URL to a live video stream may look as follows
> http://www.example.com/video.ogv . It always points to the live data,
> i.e. what is transferred "now". This maps to a current clock time,
> e.g. http://www.example.com/video.ogv?t=clock:20090726T112401Z. So, if
> we require to point 5 min back into the past, the user agent can
> easily compute this backwards to e.g.
> http://www.example.com/video.ogv?t=clock:20090726T111901Z.
> I think for this we may need to add to the use cases and requirements
> that we are also considering live streams. And we should add this
> particular case of pointing back 5min in time on a live stream to the
> "Browsing and Bookmarking" section,
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-reqs/#uc2.
> What do people think?
> 2. Another example use case that was provided is the following:
> "Let’s say you want to make an interactive Formula1 website for a live
> race, the real-time commentary page links text fragments to timeframes
> - readers can click on the text ‘Alonso accident’ and the stream they
> are watching can jump back to the accident."
> I think we can attribute that use case to the named anchors:
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-reqs/#scenario4.3
> Since this is a use case for live streaming rather than "canned"
> content, I would suggest we add it to the section. Is that ok with
> everybody?
> Best Regards,
> Silvia.
Received on Sunday, 26 July 2009 13:09:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:42 UTC