W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > March 2011

Re: [W3C Web and TV IG] Adaptive streaming MPEG DASH liaison

From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:50:06 -0700
To: 이현재 <hj08.lee@lge.com>
CC: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DC8DAE68-EAA6-47C7-A583-AB3AD54F135E@netflix.com>
Ok, so MPEG is pointing to their profiles and asking for suggestions and technical requirements.

Your response says the IG sees DASH as an "architectural framework" and a "starting point" and that further refinement for Web & TV requirements should be done in a new W3C Working Group, separate from the IG.

If that is correct, then I don't think I agree. I don't think we concluded that (or even got that far into the discussion) at the Workshop.

DASH is much more concrete than an architectural framework. And it's much more than a starting point. As I understand the scope of the IG would include requirements for adaptive streaming, so we should work on those and then decide whether DASH (or whatever else) already meets them. If it does not, then we need to decide on a venue for the additional work.

So, I'd still suggest deleting that paragraph.

...Mark



On Mar 16, 2011, at 11:30 PM, 이현재 wrote:

> Hi Mark,
> 
> The fourth paragraph is the answer for MPEG DASH liaison letter to W3C.
> Moderate adjustment is necessary if necessary.
> It's written in 3rd paragraph of the letter. http://www.w3.org/2010/11/web-

> and-tv/slides/w11869.pdf
> 
> We would like to draw your attention particularly to DASH’s profiles
> defined in DIS and would 
> welcome W3C to provide its needs and suggestions to improve them to better
> fit W3C’s needs. 
> Furthermore, MPEG welcomes W3C’s technical requirements for future
> versions of the standard.
> 
> Best regards,
> HJ
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> Sent: 없음
> To: 이현재; public-web-and-tv@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [W3C Web and TV IG] Adaptive streaming MPEG DASH liaison
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Attached (doc & pdf) are some proposed changes, along the lines of my
> previous comments on the 3GPP letter. Note that the "and has the goal..."
> text that I added regarding the Patent Policy is taken from the Patent
> Policy itself: I think it is always best with legal aspects like this just
> to quote, rather than paraphrase or characterize: the legal text is usually
> worded the way it is for good reasons.
> 
> I didn't fully understand the fourth paragraph, or why it would be of
> interest to MPEG, so I suggest to delete it. But since I didn't fully
> understand it I may have missed the intent.
> 
> ...Mark
> 
> 
> 

Received on Thursday, 17 March 2011 14:50:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:02 UTC