TV Namespaces a response to "mike"

From: allen mornington_west (amornington_west@compuserve.com)
Date: Tue, Aug 31 1999


Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 13:37:14 -0400
From: allen mornington_west <amornington_west@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:www-tv@w3.org" <www-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <199908311337_MC2-830D-C995@compuserve.com>
Subject: TV Namespaces a response to  "mike"

"mike" and Colleagues

I suggested in an earlier response that a clear statement of the
requirements is desirable.  It has not been the only suggestion.

I believe that this is as essential as trying to create yet another
glossary.


One of the earlier terms to be defined is "channel" and from its use in
this document it seems that there is confusion between the use of the term:
         "channel"      implying the RF carrier, or signal bearer mechanism
by which a service is delivered
and:
        "channel" implying the commercial identity of the service which is
borne.

For so much of the analog (TV) service world we have been used to these
terms being the same. For a digital world we need to separate these senses
- hard though this may be. One approach would be:
        "channel"       A reference to the RF or modulated signal  bearer
mechanism by which a service is delivered.
and:
        "service"       A composition of signals describing audio, data or
video media components (or essences)

Network operators may be responsible for the operation of one or more
channels and, in general, there will be one or more - often licensed -
service providers providing programs. A program would  be thus one or more
time sequential events would have been scheduled to have been delivered
within a service using the channel.

Would it be helpful to suggest tahat the list of requirements includes such
fragments as:

The (universal) naming convention for television services shall:
        ... 
#       ... handle to single TV service borne by a single channel
#       ... handle all TV services in a globally satisifactory manner.
#       ... handle the delivery of an auxiliary media service within the
same carrier 
#       ... handle the naming of digital TV services [in which there may be
more than one media (eg TV) service within a channel]
#       ....  accommodate the naming conventions currently in use in
different parts of this world with out requiring double entry. [Some areas
use call signs EG 2LO or KABC]
#       .... handle the correct identity of a service despite the use of
more than one delivery system in the overall path to the viewer [EG
delivery via a cable digital multiplex of a terrestiral digital service]
#       ... handle unambiguously the identity of services with identical
commercial identities but differnet technical properties [EG BBC World on
HD and SD]
#       ... mask from the viewer the untidiness of any o fthe work arounds
required to present a smooth viewer interface despite the differences in
the naming conventions in use at present
#       ... be reslient (if not immune) to changes in broadcasting and
bearer technology
#       ... transgess no current IPR unless the IPR holder undertakes to
permit use under FRND terms
#       ... handle the identification of an auxiliary service should it be
separated from its parent.
#       ... occupy a fixed byte space and be short [the assumption being
that the naming is not a marketing tool]
#       ... handle naming with specific reference to international
standards to a single character set and coding scheme
#       ... handle an extention by which the components of a service may be
identified [EG we can identify the clsoed caption subtitle for KABC
programs if necessary]
#       ... be independent of any specific software environment or
application environment.
#       ... be immune to current ownership or changes of ownership of
either service or delivery channel(s).
#       ... identify the [current] WARC administrative region in which the
service was initially emitted.
#       ... identify the [current] governmentally recognised territory from
which the service is composed. 
#       ... identify the Registration Authority (RA)  for each of the
sub-fields (if any) within the resulting naming convention
#       ... shall provide a highly structured naming convention [which is
essentially a small fragment of a database describing the service, its
origin, its physics, is path, its territory &c]
#       ... [or] shall provide an entirely fixed format number space
regulated by a single globally acceptable Registration Authority. [and thus
it is accessed by look up only]
#       .. [or] do something in between [identifies the regional RA,
network operator, service provider ... ]
        ...  and so on ...

No-one has validated these requirements or resolved the conflicts of such a
list ... unless something simialr was done some time back.


Allen M-W