W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-plugins@w3.org > August 2003

Re: Mixed namespaces

From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 14:28:01 +0200
Message-ID: <3F4F46D1.5000107@expway.fr>
To: Philipp Hoschka <ph@w3.org>
Cc: public-web-plugins@w3.org

Philipp Hoschka wrote:
> XML Packaging (at least in its multipart MIME incarnation) won't exactly 
> be streaming multimedia. Also, receiving a video and and audio source at 
> the same time seems impossible.

I was more considering possible future work in XML Packaging, taking multiplexed 
streaming as if it were a single document.

I guess my broader point is that if this is a historical occasion to get rid of 
plugins for good, then I'd much rather see the W3C jump on it than try to save 
the plugin way of doing it. Surprisingly enough, I didn't quite expect to solve 
the issue with a ten word sentence comprised of three bullet points... I do 
however believe that there mixed namespaces and XML Packaging are avenues to be 
explored seriously.

With XHTML+SVG+SMIL+XForms in a mixed namespaces implementation, the vast 
majority of the current Web can be expressed, with gains in functionality and 
pretty much only AV content as the loss. Isn't it worth discussing it as an 
80/20 solution, while we come up with solutions to the harder problems of 
streamed media and see how a streamed binary payload and XML documents can be 
made to be a single document (and hopefully not fall under the patent, as is the 
case with the data: URI)?

-- 
Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Research Engineer, Expway        http://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE  8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Received on Friday, 29 August 2003 08:26:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:07:55 GMT