W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-smil@w3.org > October to December 2008

Re: add zip to SMIL 3.0 players

From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:38:41 +0200
Cc: www-smil@w3.org
Message-Id: <B7284C79-B195-4020-BFB1-2A2015CC1A3C@cwi.nl>
To: Jose Ramirez <jose@multimedia4everyone.com>
I agree that a container definition would be beneficial but it's not  
something you can graft on in a couple of days.

For one thing, people will want containers for many different reasons.  
For example, MMS uses containers because they want to ship the media  
with the SMIL presentation. They didn't really care about size (their  
SMIL files are tiny), so they decided to use mime-multipart like  
containers.

Daisy books, on the other hand, sometimes have immense SMIL files (one  
guy I know always talks about this dictionary or encyclopedia that  
gives no end to problems because of its size). These will probably  
want each of the SMIL files to be zipped separately, so a rader  
doesn't have to unzip a whole encyclopedia, only the index and the  
relevant chapter.

If the SYMM group defined one standard container format it would   
likely do more damage than good, unless all the use cases were studied  
and catered for.

In the mean time, if someone want to register mimetype application/x- 
zip+xml+smil (if that's allowable syntax:-): go ahead. The magic of  
HTTP should even allow server-side decoding for clients that don't  
understand it.
--
Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma  
Goldman
Received on Saturday, 18 October 2008 20:39:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:53:32 GMT