RE: about tv:

From: Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Date: Sun, Feb 14 1999


From: "Larry Masinter" <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
To: "Warner ten Kate" <tenkate@natlab.research.philips.com>, "Michael A. Dolan" <miked@tbt.com>
Cc: <www-tv@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 09:54:15 PST
Message-ID: <000001be5843$0973f500$15d0000d@copper.parc.xerox.com>
Subject: RE: about tv:

The questions of "what is a URN" or "what is a URL" tend to
lean away from engineering and toward philosophy or even
religion.

I suggest a different approach. Imagine, for a moment, the
possibility that an author might want to create content
which is intended to be delivered MORE THAN ONE WAY. That
is, not JUST by 'tv', but, say, the same content delivered
EITHER by 'tv' OR via HTTP on a (forfend) regular old PC.

But what would a regular old PC do with this "tv" URL?
Clearly it doesn't mean "turn on the TV now and watch it".
There's some other semantics that is actually wanted;
you're invoking some image which is inherited from the
context, I suppose. I'm not entirely sure.

I urge you to think out of the box and come up with
a design that's actually useful in multiple contexts.
Sometimes you get boxed in by imagining a world in which
everyone is just watching interacting with web pages 
while watching their TV.

But people don't just watch the web. They save it, store it,
forward it, mail it, put it in databases, search it. 
How could you design something that would work in all
those other scenarios, at least as well as today's
'best practice' URL uses? Don't create a design that's
_only_ useful for "www-tv".

Larry