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

Re: Concerns about backwards compatibility of media fragments

From: Hausenblas, Michael <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 20:00:06 +0100
Message-ID: <5F9AB870-0045-4150-947B-7C175FC17998@deri.org>
To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Boris,

I did the analysis, see [1], but I don't see fragments explicitly mentioned in the registration document, hence maybe the confusion.

Cheers,
Michael


[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/MediaTypeReview

Sent from my iPad

On 6 May 2011, at 19:43, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:

> Section 2.2.1 of http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-media-frags-20110317/ says:
> 
>  An analysis of all media type registrations showed that there is
>  not a single media type registration in the audio/*, image/*, video/*
>  branches that is currently defining fragments or fragment semantics.
> 
> I'm not sure how this analysis was conducted, but image/svg+xml is defined to be SVG and SVG does in fact define fragment semantics.
> 
> This means that applying media fragments to SVG images, at the very least, would cause behavior changes in current UAs.
> 
> For an example, see the simple SVG testcase in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011May/0114.html
> 
> I'm not quite sure what to do about this problem, honestly.
> 
> -Boris
> 
Received on Friday, 6 May 2011 18:59:03 GMT

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