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

Re: short report of 2010-03-31 teleconference

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 22:19:01 +1100
Message-ID: <l2t2c0e02831003310419j176f2d99p520ba1a2883b9745@mail.gmail.com>
To: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr
Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Sorry about tonight - I exceptionally had to have a cinema night with
my son, so couldn't make it, but forgot to let you know beforehand.
Sending out the meeting notice only a few hours before the meeting
actually didn't help planning it either.

Anyway - I am still curious with Yves' objection to the
Range-Equivalent header. I have not understood why we cannot use it in
the reply. It is not being used in the request, so there should be no
issue, IMO. But I have yet to hear and understand the reasons.

Cheers,
Silvia.


2010/3/31 RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>:
> Dear all,
>
> There were *just* Yves and I today on the call. So we have obviously a
> problem of time slot if nobody can make the telecon. There has been the
> switch to Daylight Saving time for Europe and USA but now, Conrad and Silvia
> have the telecon one hour earlier which is not convenient for them. I would
> like to change the telecon time so that _everybody_ can make it! Please,
> send me either publicly or privately your hard constraint for having telecon
> on Wednesday so I can figure out which is the good timeslot.
>
> Nothing has happened since the F2F and we need to move on. Yves has 3
> outstanding actions (123, 152 and 154) that he would have completed by next
> Tuesday (despite the fact is on holidays). I will make a full pass on the
> document on Tuesday night and I would like we decide to publish a new WD on
> Wednesday during the telecon so that the document can be published on
> Thursday 08/04/2010. Wednesday will therefore be your chance to have a
> motivated objection for not publishing but let's hope you will not have one
> :-)
>
> Among the issues that would be hopefully resolved before the next
> publication:
> †- ACTION-152: Yves will add back the media segment production and complete
> the grammar. All the constraints cannot be expressed formally, so we will
> have a paragraph that explain in natural language what are these additional
> constraints. There is also the pseudo-algorithm from Philip that helps
> clarifying things. All that must read smoothly. Note Philip that Yves
> attended the IRI F2F meeting and that there is outstanding issues when
> parsing the media fragment URI current syntax with the name dimension if the
> value use strange characters just to know which part of the URI is encoded
> how. So there might be problem with your pseudo algorithm, Yves might give
> more details.
> †- ACTION-123: Yves will add a first stab as ABNF syntax for the headers.
> However, we do have an outstanding issue with the so-called Range-Equivalent
> header. Apparently, we cannot add new headers if we issue a Range request,
> and have a 206 Partial Response ... which means, the equivalence between
> bytes and another unit must be encoded into the Content-Range and we need to
> work out the exact syntax!
> †- ACTION-154: Yves will add a 4th recipe in the document, where the request
> is expressed in a custom unit such as second, and the answer is expressed in
> seconds too.
> 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 Wednesday, 31 March 2010 11:19:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:38 GMT