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

Re: Temporal fragments of media with time stamps

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:51:36 +0100
Message-ID: <4B600CA8.8080504@cwi.nl>
To: "Bailer, Werner" <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
CC: "public-media-fragment@w3.org" <public-media-fragment@w3.org>, Richard Wright-ARCHIVES <richard.wright@bbc.co.uk>
Dear all,

Great discussion, thanks Werner for bringing the issue.
Reading this whole thread, I feel we have partially answered some of the 
questions but ask many more:
   - The current spec mentions media with embedded time stamps [1] but 
we need to make sure that it is _also_ handled in the protocol section. 
In particular, should we make a switch ... case depending on if the 
fragments is specified in npt or smpte time codes.
   - What is the real duration of the media 
http://www.example.com/example.mp4, which has 10 seconds worth of video, 
with timestamps 01:00:00:00 through 01:00:10:00? 10 seconds or 1 hour 
and 10 seconds (Davy)?
   - In case of a media fragment Range request, what should be returned 
in the response header? Jack's preference is for no timestamps. Is the 
instance length optional or mandatory per the Content-Range header syntax?

Should we raise another issue in the tracker?

   RaphaŽl

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/#processing-overview-interpretation

-- 
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 Wednesday, 27 January 2010 09:52:26 GMT

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