Re: TV Namespaces a response to "mike"
From: Michael A. Dolan (miked@tbt.com)
Date: Tue, Aug 31 1999
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990831171440.00974e40@cts.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:14:40 -0700
To: www-tv@w3.org (WWW TV List)
From: "Michael A. Dolan" <miked@tbt.com>
Subject: Re: TV Namespaces a response to "mike"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Allen-
Thanks for the response. Comments below. Just a suggestion - while
I am not prepared yet personally to discuss requirements, perhaps you
could re-post your proposal separately from this thread for those
that might wish to?
Mike
At 01:37 PM 8/31/99 -0400, allen mornington_west wrote:
>
>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.
It was not intended to be either of the above, and nothing was meant
to be implied. It is intended to be just the Program Stream as
stated. And, it is specifically *not* RF emissions, carriers, or
commercial entities. I would pikc a term like "Station" for this.
Do you think this entity should be defined?
>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.
This definition is inconsistent with ATSC terminology and thus
undesirable from my perspective. I tried carefully in these
definitions to not conflict with any existing definitions in MPEG,
DVB or ATSC. They are thus not perfect for any one of these spaces,
but they also are not in conflict.
I did think awhile about whether to call it "channel" or "service".
I went with "channel", since there was no conflicting DVB definition
(that I am aware of), it is more commonly understood; and thus more
likely to be used in practice on this list by everyone.
>and:
> "service" A composition of signals describing audio,
data or
>video media components (or essences)
As I noted in my definitions, this is, in fact, the DVB term for the
ATSC channel. As far as I can tell, your definition for "service" is
identical to my definition of "channel" (a Program Stream). Am I
missing something about how your definition is different, or are you
simply suggesting the term be "service" instead of "channel"?
>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.
You introduced several new terms above:
network operator
service provider
events
So, I'm not sure everyone understands what you said (and with the new
definition of channel, I'm not sure I do either). Can you please
offer definitions for these terms if you think we need them?
Regards,
Mike
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBN8xkzil9dIG/haQGEQISYwCgx+YKCRnObqzIZiLmaRrozLe17+EAoLBh
28fUWJays4b/umr+4uKK7hGd
=dXC3
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBN8xv3yl9dIG/haQGEQJhCQCg1vmWfommmGOIGVg+83QdC1t8YNEAoNxy
ORjNiwBb97afr4cLXvOi5UP5
=EdGS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. Dolan, Representing DIRECTV, (619)445-9070
PO Box 1673 Alpine, CA 91903 FAX: (619)445-6122