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

Re: ACTION-156 -- Conrad Parker to add a "bandwidth conservation use case"

From: Conrad Parker <conrad@metadecks.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 12:57:32 +0900
Message-ID: <AANLkTikyFwg_ya9gbL9tPcCVOKqbWcHLA58cKY6bQ2M3@mail.gmail.com>
To: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr
Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>

I've just reviewed that thread:


I was introducing a scenario in order to discuss why it's useful to
have separate request mechanisms for both media-fragments and
byte-ranges, so that it is possible to request a byte-range of (the
response to a more complex media-fragment request).

I don't think that it is worth introducing a use-case for this. Making
things cacheable shouldn't be done by some new sub-section with a new
mechanism; rather, the existing mechanisms should be designed to be
inherently cacheable. Rather than introduce new use-cases, I think it
would be more useful to document how a UA would handle partial
downloads of media-fragments.

(Please close ACTION-156)


2010/5/20 RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>:
> Dear Conrad,
> During the 5th F2F meeting in Ghent in March, you propose to add one more
> use case to the "Use Cases and Requirements" document named "bandwidth
> conservation use case". This has triggered your action
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/156
> We haven't heard about it since. What is the status? Is this something you
> still want to do? Or should we drop this action?
> Best regards.
> †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 Wednesday, 9 June 2010 03:58:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:45 UTC