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

Re: Media Fragments URI parsing: pseudo algorithm code

From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 16:30:44 +0200
To: "Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "Yves Lafon" <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vfg89iulatwj1d@philip-pc.gothenburg.osa>
On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 16:19:31 +0200, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>> I would agree to this analysis: #foo=bar is not a valid MF
>> *dimension*. It is, however, a valid media fragment URI, since a media
>> fragment URI is given as a URI on a media resource that has a fragment
>> specified and we specify fragment through name-value pairs. The
>
> You can only know it's a media resource when you dereference it.
> http://www.example.com/map#lat=-16.5&long=-151.7 is a valid Media  
> Fragment, but it may be a fragment indicating a point in a map (for  
> example, it might even be something else).

How is this relevant for unknown name-value pairs specifically? #t=10  
could also be used on non-media resources [1]. A browser could simply not  
parse and handle the fragment component until after making sure that it's  
dealing with a whitelisted MIME type. (In practice I think that amounts to  
only considering MF when used together with <audio>, <video> or when  
directing the browser directly to a media resource.)

[1] strictly speaking: resources with a MIME type that hasn't opted in to  
MF in its RFC

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 2010 14:31:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:39 GMT