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: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 22:46:28 +0100
Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Message-Id: <81562024-5C34-477A-8DB6-629FF8A10909@cwi.nl>
To: Davy Van Deursen <davy.vandeursen@ugent.be> 

On  24-Dec-2010, at 15:05 , Davy Van Deursen wrote:

> Same here, an appendix or a separate document doesn't matter for me. As long as RTSP can be published while at the same time we can reach CR in January.


Same for me.

I see a slight procedural advantage to a separate note, namely that that note will disappear when it is eventually superseded by a true standards track document, where this is a bit difficult for an appendix of the spec. OTOH, having the RTSP stuff together with the other MF stuff is a win for implementors. And the chance that RTSP-MF would get standardised separately from MF 2.0 is probably very small anyway.
--
Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Received on Tuesday, 28 December 2010 21:47:10 GMT

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