W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > February 2012

RE: [profile] Profile spec title

From: John Simmons <johnsim@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 01:21:33 +0000
To: "Dewa, Yoshiharu (OSAKI)" <Yoshiharu.Dewa@jp.sony.com>, "Vickers, Mark" <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com>, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
CC: Jan Lindquist <jan.lindquist@ericsson.com>, "public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FF4EB51321FAE847A9650D1E9ABB57A433F3E968@TK5EX14MBXC205.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
I suggest it would be helpful to agree on the scope section of this document, and then pick a title that accurately reflects that scope. 

Below is the scope as it is today. The first two bullets are really the scope. The following two paragraphs are there for clarification.

I believe the scope should be more precise - instead of "set of languages" it should state something about "profiles of W3C specifications". And I believe it should be specific about video services. 

Once this is boiled down to one hard paragraph, the clarification paragraphs can go away and the title will declare itself.

John
 
==================================================================
The scope of this document is limited to: 

- provide references to a set of languages that shall be supported by devices and can be used by content and service providers to author content and services to be presented to the end user.

- provide references to a set of metrics that can be used to evaluate performances of devices

The scope of this document is not to describe an entire operating system. In particular, hardware and software configuration that user would be expected to have on their devices are out of scope. 

The scope of this document is not to describe a unique end-to-end delivery system. In particular, mandating a specific end-to-end network configuration (including network protocols, video codecs, video streaming technologies and so on) is out of scope for this document. Nonetheless this document may describe how some specific technologies may be combined together in order to provide a functional TV service.
=======================================================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Dewa, Yoshiharu (OSAKI) [mailto:Yoshiharu.Dewa@jp.sony.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 4:54 PM
To: Vickers, Mark; Giuseppe Pascale
Cc: Jan Lindquist; public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG
Subject: RE: [profile] Profile spec title

All,

I would like to keep some word for CE devices. If it just say "interactive video services", the baseline for measurement of some parameters and/or sub setting will rather be vague and the result will be unpractical.

Rgs,
-- Yoshiharu

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vickers, Mark [mailto:Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 3:10 AM
> To: Giuseppe Pascale
> Cc: Jan Lindquist; public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG
> Subject: Re: [profile] Profile spec title
> 
> "Web and TV" is very unclear in meaning. We constantly have to explain 
> that the Web and TV IG is not limited to TV devices. We shouldn't 
> extend this confusion to the profile spec. I believe the profile is 
> defining client requirements for displaying video services and so 
> "Video Services" should be in the title.
> 
> 
> On Feb 7, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote:
> 
> > Would one of the following title+subtitle address both needs?:
> >
> > "Web and TV profile"
> > Guidelines for integration of interactive video services in a
> browser-based environment
> >
> > "Web and TV guidelines"
> > A profile of HTML5 and other web technologies for interactive video
> services
> >
> > /g
> > On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:58:23 +0100, Jan Lindquist
> <jan.lindquist@ericsson.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> The profile is not only about HTML5 but other W3c standards so it 
> >> would
> be misleading to have HTML5 in the title. In the spirit of the IG how 
> about "web and TV profile". The name of the profile is not as critical 
> as knowing the breadth of the areas it should cover. This profile may 
> live for a while and it in the context of the industry attempt to 
> influence the work in W3C with a clear list of specs that are being used and how they may be used.
> It will become a reference point by other standard groups. By using 
> the same name as the IG it can help see the relationship.
> >> Regards,
> >> JanL
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Vickers, Mark [mailto:Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com]
> >>> Sent: den 7 februari 2012 15:24
> >>> To: Giuseppe Pascale
> >>> Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG
> >>> Subject: Re: [profile] Profile spec title
> >>>
> >>> How about "HTML5 Video Services Profile"?
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 7, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 17:26:40 +0100, Vickers, Mark
> >>> <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> 5. Title: The goal for me is a profile of HTML5 for video
> >>> services. There are two differences with "Web&TV Profile".
> >>> >> - I want to include HTML5 in the title because this is
> >>> HTML5-related
> >>> >> and HTM5-centric
> >>> >> - I don't like including "TV". This continues to cause
> >>> confusion. It is clearer to describe an HTML5 profile for video 
> >>> services.
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > I don't have strong opinions on the title but I would note
> >>> the following:
> >>> > - A title should be short ( the subtitle explains a bit
> >>> more what we are doing).
> >>> > - I've tried to use the word "TV services" in the subtitle that 
> >>> > is hopefully a bit less confusing (or maybe not?). I have 
> >>> > defined this term as
> >>> >
> >>> > "For the purposes of this document a TV service is a
> >>> commercial video service that may include elements of 
> >>> interactivity and that provides a coherent user experience.
> >>> >
> >>> > - while this profile is html5 based this is not only about
> >>> html5. I'm not against highlighting the HTML5 centric approach but 
> >>> I wouldn't call this "an html5 profile".
> >>> >
> >>> > So in short: I'm fine with your comments but I cannot come
> >>> up with a better title/subtitle. Suggestions are welcome.
> >>> >
> >>> > /g
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >> See you on the call.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks,
> >>> >> mav
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Feb 6, 2012, at 6:15 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> One note: the zakim bridge is overbooked.
> >>> >>> So just in case we see that people have problem dialing
> >>> in (in such
> >>> >>> case please login on IRC and let us know) I set-up this
> >>> Opera bridge.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> NOTE: ONLY TO BE USED IF WE SEE THAT ZAKIM DOESN'T WORK
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Phone bridge details:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Conference ID:            33909
> >>> >>> Start Date and Time:      Monday 06.02.2012 17:00:00 CET/CEST
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Bridge Numbers:
> >>> >>> Norway                           +47 23 69 26 03
> >>> >>> USA                                +1 800 201 4229 (Toll-Free)
> >>> >>> Poland (Wroclaw)	        +48 71 719 6099
> >>> >>> Poland (Warsaw)         	+48 22 262 0799
> >>> >>> Japan                             +81 3 5435 8394
> >>> >>> Russia				  +7 812 448 7876
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Conference Name:          tv profile
> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------
> >>> >>> Please contact SysAdmin at +47 23 69 33 60 for assistance.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> /g
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 12:06:15 +0100, Giuseppe Pascale
> >>> <giuseppep@opera.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>> Here the call details for todays call
> >>> >>>> (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Telco)
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Schedule: Monday, 16:00Z (=8:00 Pacific, 11:00 Eastern, 17:00 
> >>> >>>> Europe, 01:00 Korea/Japan)
> >>> >>>> Phone: US: +1 617 761 6200 or SIP: zakim@voip.w3.org 
> >>> >>>> Conference
> >>> >>>> Code: 26632 IRC channel: #webtv
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> And here the Agenda for todays call:
> >>> >>>>
> (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Agenda_Telco_6/2/2012)
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> * Review of Charter
> >>> >>>> (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Charter)
> >>> >>>> * Call schedule
> >>> >>>> * TF tools (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile)
> >>> >>>> * Process
> >>> >>>> * Initial feedbacks on the draft
> >>> >>>> (http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/tip/tvprofile/tv.html)
> >>> >>>> * AOB
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> /g
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:00:59 +0100, Giuseppe Pascale
> >>> <giuseppep@opera.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>> Hi all,
> >>> >>>>> the poll [1] is now closed and the winner is...
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> Monday, February 6, 2012 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM UTC
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> In this first call we will discuss the scope of the TV
> >>> profile work, how do we want the group to be organized and 
> >>> timeline (if any).
> >>> >>>>> If you have any other topic you want to add to the
> >>> agenda let me know.
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> I'll send around call details ASAP.
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> [1] http://doodle.com/h6rfnkrqyi3uinpi
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Giuseppe Pascale
> >>> >>> TV & Connected Devices
> >>> >>> Opera Software
> >>> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Giuseppe Pascale
> >>> > TV & Connected Devices
> >>> > Opera Software
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Giuseppe Pascale
> > TV & Connected Devices
> > Opera Software
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 20:16:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:06 UTC