Re: one more requirement

From: Michael A. Dolan (miked@tbt.com)
Date: Mon, Jan 11 1999


Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990111102241.007d9c80@cts.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:22:41 -0800
To: fin@finseth.com
From: "Michael A. Dolan" <miked@tbt.com>
Cc: www-tv@w3.org
Subject: Re: one more requirement

Craig-

The use of any syntax in the application scenarios, such as "tv:", was
specifically NOT meant to be a proposed syntax, but an example for
clarification only.  And, the document explicitly says this.  Hence "tv:"
(or anything else) is not proposed as a syntax anywhere that I can find.

What I am proposing is that the exact syntax I mentioned be added to the
requirements.

As I mentioned, it may not be appropriate to add this to the application
scenarios, and can be put into the requirements document if folks feel that
is more appropriate.

Regards,
	Mike

At 10:56 AM 1/11/99 -0600, Craig A. Finseth wrote:
>   I think we should add to the application scenario list (or requirements,
>   whichever is more appropriate) the existing commercial practice for "tv"
>   URI's in existing (NTSC) broadcast systems.  This list may not be
complete,
>   but the ones I know about are:
>
>These are already in the applications list.
>
>	   tv:                    [reference to the currently tuned channel]
>Item #1.
>
>	   tv:<channel_number>    tv:7
>Item #3.
>
>	   tv:<network_name>      tv:abc
>Item #4.
>
>As this document lists the applications and not UR* syntaxes, I did
>not attempt to catalog all the existing variants.
>
>	...
>
>Craig
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. Dolan, Representing DIRECTV,  (619)445-9070   FAX: (619)445-6122
PO Box 1673 Alpine, CA 91903, Overnight: 20239 Japatul Rd, Alpine, CA 91901