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

Re: xywh on images with no clearly defined size

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 08:19:34 +1000
Message-ID: <BANLkTimEZHp+GMhzpvaqwt0STh=Zf6qJ+w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Hi Jack,

I am concerned about this position. I shared it when we started the
group and I never thought spatial fragments would become relevant in
the near future. However, now it has happened and the CSS WG wants to
pick it up. Therefore, we cannot leave this issue undefined. We can
state that we need help by the CSS WG and the SVG WG to resolve this
and maybe we need a F2F meeting or phone conference with them or
something to discuss this through. But I don't believe putting our
heads in the sand is going to help - it will just result in the CSS WG
having to define it themselves.


On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl> wrote:
> I've pondered the issue raised in the CSS thread (what about if the image file has multiple images of different sizes) and one of the issues raised in the SVG thread (svg images don't always have a size) and I'm tempted to explicitly state that these cases are undefined. Probably to be defined for MF 2.0 or something.
> When we started the group we stated that we would concentrate on temporal fragments, because they are the most important, and we would define something reasonable for other cases (spatial, track selection) that would at the very least not get in the way of future standardisation. I think that this is clearly such a case: doing the right thing here is not something I think we can do with e few mail messages....
> --
> Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
> If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Received on Sunday, 15 May 2011 22:20:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:46 UTC