W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Joining the Media Fragment WG and contribution for the use cases of media fragments

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 12:30:41 +0100
Message-ID: <4D36CB61.7010304@eurecom.fr>
To: Nobuhisa Shiraishi <n-shiraishi@bq.jp.nec.com>
CC: public-media-fragment@w3.org
Dear Nobu,

As we briefly discussed on IRC, you are encouraged to describe the use 
case in a new wiki page.

 > | We also raised a number of questions:
 > |    - do you need to specify 2 regions within a single URI? Currently,
 > | the media fragment URI does not allow this use case
 > |    - do you need to specify moving regions within a media fragment URI?
 >
 > My answers to both of your questions are "Yes".
 >
 > In the trajectory analysis use case, we need to input several regions in
 > an image to the object coordinate locator engine.
 > In all of the 3 use cases I proposed, we need to specify moving regions
 > with a media fragment URI as a fragment correspond to an unique person.

Currently, the media fragment URI does not enable to address 2 different 
regions in a single URI. Furthermore, the specification does not enable 
to address a moving region over the time. The rationale is that it could 
be very complex to specify such a thing and we do not think that e.g. 
Fourrier transform formula describing trajectories should be specified 
in a URI. MPEG-7 enables to do complex object tracking: do you have the 
same need?

 > -----
 > Considering above aspect, I think some new requirements for media
 > fragments URIs might be raised up. For example, how to embed the
 > accuracy of cropping in media fragments URIs, a negotiation protocols
 > for aligning accuracy of media fragments, exchanging combination of
 > several fragments in different images, etc.
 > -----

That are indeed good questions. We will discuss the accuracy aspect on 
the test cases framework that will check the implementations.

Do you plan to provide some client and/or server implementation of the 
Media Fragment URI specification ? We would be very happy to hear your 
plans with respect to implementation and a short description of the 
application / use case you would like to realize.

 > I want my proposal will be a starting point for the discussions of these
 > future requirements for (the next?) media fragments URIs specifications.

Yes, good point. It would also be good to list what are all the other 
things not permitted by the spec yet that we could do in future versions.

 > BTW, can I create a new page on Media Fragments WG wiki[1] and put my
 > proposals on the page for further discussions and updates of my use
 > cases proposal?
 > [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/Main_Page

Yes, please do so, thanks.
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/
-- 
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, 19 January 2011 11:34:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:42 GMT