Re: E-E: Re: URL: Comments on TV URI reqs I-D

From: Gomer Thomas (gomer@lgerca.com)
Date: Tue, Nov 24 1998


Message-ID: <365AFCDB.5B59AC2C@lgerca.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 13:37:15 -0500
From: Gomer Thomas <gomer@lgerca.com>
To: www-tv@w3.org, e-e@toocan.philabs.research.philips.com
Subject: Re: E-E: Re: URL: Comments on TV URI reqs I-D

Craig, Warner -

Perhaps I am not understanding what you mean by "resolvable under any of the
following network access conditions". I have been interpreting this to mean
that a URI should be resolvable when the resource referenced by the URI is
in any of those locations (assuming, of course that the system attempting to
do the resolving has access to the location containing the resource). My
objection is that we should focus only on the case when the resource
referenced by the URI is in a TV broadcast.

If I am misinterpreting your meaning, please help enlighten me.

Warner ten Kate wrote:

> Craig A. Finseth wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps if we changed the requirement to read:
> >
> > o  A URI should be resolvable under any of the following network
> >    access conditions:
> >    -  TV Broadcast, same or another network
> >    -  Internet
> > >   -  Home/local storage and playback of TV broadcast content <
> >    -  Other (future) networks
> >
> > ? This permits common operations without expanding the scope too much.
> >
>
> If that removes your objections, fine with me.
> However, shouldn't we look to make this point more generally,
> e.g. in the Abstract ?
>
> I mean we are talking about URIs to access TV Broadcast content,
> aren't we ? What should we specify (in this context) about
> URIs accessing Web content ?
>
> Warner.



--
Gomer Thomas
LGERCA, Inc.
40 Washington Road
Princeton Junction, NJ 08550
phone: 609-716-3513
fax: 609-716-3503