- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 08:32:04 +1000
- To: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
- Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Thanks, that's what I was after. Did you notice, though, that name and track examples are being used in the REC doc [1], even though the specification for these have been removed? REC looks a bit inconsistent because of that. Anyway - I think it's best to reference the CR doc in the HTML spec because of this. Thanks, Silvia. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/ On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr> wrote: > Dear Silvia, > > >> I've just had a look at http://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/ and found >> that the section on named fragment URIs is completely gone. Is the >> spec that is at http://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/ actually complete? >> Where else is there a spec that is complete (i.e. has all the sections >> that we originally authored)? I'm asking because I've seen arguments >> being made that there is no such thing as named media fragments and >> therefore no such thing will be recommended to be implemented in >> browsers. >> Can somebody please clarify? > > > The Named and Track dimensions are out of the recommendation which is the > (basic) version of Media Fragments URI 1.0, per group decision. > You need to have a look at the (advanced) Media Fragments URI 1.0 (group > note) to get those dimensions described, e.g. > http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-media-frags-20111201/ > > Raphaël > > -- > Raphaël Troncy > EURECOM, Campus SophiaTech > Multimedia Communications Department > 450 route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, 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 Monday, 10 June 2013 22:32:51 UTC