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

Re: ACTION-207: Poll regarding the fact that RTSP will be discussed in a separate note

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:07:28 +0100
Message-ID: <4D1462D0.10006@eurecom.fr>
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
CC: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear Dave,

> The poll outlines 3 possibilities, and then has a yes/no possibility
> to answer, and there is no question (no question mark), so I find
> myself unable to answer!

Apologies, I always found difficult to phrase correctly a yes/no 
question while giving the appropriate context.
As Silvia said, the question was:

"Should the processing of Media Fragment URI over the RTSP protocol be 
described in a separate document with the status of a WG Note?"

and you answered "yes" with the comment "I don't mind, it should be 
published" ... which I understand, you don't mind where it is published.

There is a consensus that this document should be published and be 
publicly available. The question is therefore how and where? The poll is 
meant to decide if the group wants this piece *in* the reck track spec 
OR *outside* the spec (i.e. in the WG Note).

The cost for putting it in the rec track spec is to issue another LC WD. 
So far, Davy and Jack consider this cost as too high. Silvia has a clear 
preference for having this in the spec, but "will not stand in the 
group's way though". Philip introduced a third way: having this part in 
the spec, but as an informal appendix.

I have re-opened the poll so that more people can answer: Erik, Raphael, 
Yves, Thomas, Michael, Conrad, at least ...
Best wishes.

   RaphaŽl

-- 
RaphaŽl Troncy
EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
2229, route des CrÍtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France.
e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242
Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/
Received on Friday, 24 December 2010 09:11:06 GMT

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