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

Re: marking some sections as "ready for implementation"

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:05:10 +0100
Message-ID: <4B716B96.4060708@cwi.nl>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
CC: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear Silvia,

> For this we should mark sections that we agree on as "ready to
> implement". But to make that call, we need a group agreement.

Thanks for this proposal. I have scheduled this discussion for 
tomorrow's telecon.

> One open issue here is the NPT time scheme, which currently has a "s",
> which we discussed to drop in another thread and update the reference
> to http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime. Let's decide about this in the
> next meeting, if we can and propagate the change into the spec.

As far as I remember, the main reason why we introduced the "s" was 
after a comment from Dave Singer that we should try to be Google syntax 
compatible. Is this not anymore a requirement we want to fulfill?

> Other open issues from the last discussion on this were: marking
> things "normative" and "informative", and the lack of error cases.

I see two thread of discussions:
   - Making up sections as normative vs informative. Honestly, I cannot 
see that happening before we are LC or CR.
   - Marking up sections as reasonably stable, mature, ready for test 
implementations, etc. ... which I think can be discussed tomorrow and 
should be out top priority.

> We have scheduled to talk about error cases next week, so maybe we can
> concentrate specifically on error cases for temporal URIs to complete
> these in the spec (section 5.1.5 has a start).

Yes, added in the agenda.
Cheers.

   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 Tuesday, 9 February 2010 14:06:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:37 GMT