Re: one more requirement

From: Robert Frey (rfrey@enscorp.com)
Date: Mon, Jan 11 1999


Message-ID: <369A4685.AD473D32@enscorp.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:44:21 -0500
From: Robert Frey <rfrey@enscorp.com>
To: www-tv@w3.org
Subject: Re: one more requirement

Sorry for the intrusion but what about setting the default value of the "tv:"
resource to be the current live tv channel/station/picture whatever it may be for a
given household/device. My understanding of current set-top design methodology
suggests that the set-top's tuner can be easily 'asked' for its current
setting/station. Default would simply be "tv:" with no parameters

When I worked at NetChannel with the experimental Navio set-top box we'd designate
an image (stream) of type tv by invoking "img src=tv: " .With no parameter this
would imply the current picture/station or whatever other source may be applicable
(VCR, DVD, VHS etc)

When one wanted to select a specific channel (say "6") we used "tv:6" to designate
the 'local' channel lineup as determined from the user's geographical location as
mapped against the particular cable system that user belonged to. We almost always
knew what network/program etc. a given cable channel would be. Given this knowledge
it should be a relatively minor issue to find a specific program or network for any
given user. The same could be said for a designator of type "tv:nbc" also.  One can
easily infer from web server environment variables that tv:nbc

As far an unique is concerend.  The problem could be easily rectified by referring
to a simple database of cable channel lineups for a given area. The difference is
on what station I might find CBS in my area, this can be determined by simply
asking the cable system in question.

Sorry if any of this is repeat.  Just thought I'd offer a few words.

Frey



Craig A. Finseth wrote:

>    At the risk of degenerating into a purely philosophical debate, I'm not sure
>    I agree that the "tv:" URL doesn't describe an "image."  The television
>
> I agree with Dan: I believe that the "tv:" concept describes an image
> (stream).
>
> The problem is that it doesn't describe a _unique_ image (stream).  In
> other words, the image shown on my set may be different from the image
> shown on your set.
>
> On the other hand, it's so insane useful (i.e., it fits as the target
> of "src=" tags just where you want it and in ways that a <tv> tag
> would not) that I can see a justification that the UR* gods (whoever
> they are, probably the authors of RFC 2396) might want to grant a
> dispensation here.
>
> In any event, I totally agree that we need some way to refer to the
> current tv image.  Until we hear from the UR* gods, I'm not convinced
> that a UR* is the best way (nor am I convinced that it is not).
>
> None of the above arguments apply to the channel number form.
>
> Craig