- From: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@telecom-paristech.fr>
- Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 09:16:06 +0200
- To: public-tt@w3.org
Hi all, Le 01/10/2015 18:40, Nigel Megitt a écrit : > PROPOSAL: Draft a WG Note describing the profile short name > registry and updating the IANA media registration, based on > what's in the current profile registry wiki page plus the > addition of the codec parameter to the existing TTML media type > registration. > > nigel: Does that address Cyril's concern about using the codec > profile? My concerns were that: a) if the registry is a note, it should not contain normative material b) the registry does not confuse people by redefining what MPEG defines c) the use of the identifier would be beneficial even outside of MPEG files, in particular for plain TTML over HTTP. a) has been addressed by some clarifications that Mike made. b) is partially addressed as the 'stpp' row is still there. c) is addressed by the IANA update. > > mike: Yes, without going into all the details, the RFC is out > of date, but we can independently > ... proceed here with tidying up, to resolve any public use or > adoption. Cyril is concerned > ... more globally about non-W3C infrastructure issues. We can > solve ours locally. I'm not sure what this means, which RFC you are talking about or what you mean by "non-W3C infrastructure issues". FYI, the next MPEG meeting is at the end of October. Can the Note be published by then? In any case, can I ask that the group makes a liaison to MPEG informing about that Note so that MPEG can decide on using it for defining its codecs parameter? Cyril -- Cyril Concolato Multimedia Group / Telecom ParisTech http://concolato.wp.mines-telecom.fr/ @cconcolato
Received on Friday, 2 October 2015 07:16:34 UTC