W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > December 2010

Re: ACTION-199, ACTION-200 and ISSUE-19

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 23:43:35 +1100
Message-ID: <AANLkTinPfGN2Vn2HSqv7H53NxeahG5B1PtAZALcJdoxv@mail.gmail.com>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Cc: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>, Philip Jšgenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 9:56 PM, RaphaŽl Troncy
<raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr> wrote:
> Hi Yves,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
>> It is not about validation but about generation rules, if you can adapt
>> something along the lines of
>>
>> "The formal grammar describe what producers of media fragment should
>> output. It is not taking into account possible percent-encoding that are
>> valid according to rfc3896. The grammar is not a specification on how a
>> media fragment should be parsed, See section 5.1 for the Parsing rules..."
>
> Indeed. The new paragraph now reads:
>
> "The formal grammar defined in the section 4 Media Fragments Syntax
> describes what producers of media fragment should output. It is not taking
> into account possible percent-encoding that are valid according to RFC 3986
> and the grammar is not a specification of how a media fragment should be
> parsed. Therefore, we present in the section 5.1 Processing Media Fragment
> URI how a media fragment URI could be parsed."

Yup, that's much better.
Silvia.
Received on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 12:44:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:40 GMT