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

Re: Notify user agent available fragment

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 21:52:39 +1000
Message-ID: <u2k2c0e02831005040452qd5fd6d34wa8d08a6937cd899b@mail.gmail.com>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Cc: Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>, Jeroen Wijering <jeroen@longtailvideo.com>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
2010/5/4 RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>:
> Dear all,
>
> Le 04/05/2010 03:22, Silvia Pfeiffer a ťcrit :
>>
>> Incidentally, reaching the HAVE_METADATA state will also be a
>> precursor to some of the cases that the MF spec identifies, such as:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#processing-protocol-UA-mapped
>>
>> orhttp://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#processing-protocol-Server-mapped
>> . Thus it's not unreasonable to deal with this condition for certain
>> usage cases.
>
> Indeed! And I think we should write this explicitly in the spec as each time
> I explained the work of the Media Fragments WG in a presentation, I get this
> as a question. Who wants to edit the spec to mention this?

5.2.1 states:
"This is the case typically where a user agent has already downloaded
those parts of a media resource that allow it to do or guess the
mapping, e.g. headers or a resource, or an index of a resource."

If we want to stay independent of the HTML5 specification, this is an
acceptable description of the condition, IMHO. If we want to use HTML5
as an example, we can certainly add the note on HAVE_METADATA.

Raphael, I think no matter whether it is written in the spec or not,
you will always get this questions, since it is a core issue to
understand. ;-)

Cheers,
Silvia.
Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2010 11:53:35 GMT

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