RE: I-D ACTION:draft-zigmond-tv-url-03.txt

From: Martin Spamer (
Date: Tue, Jan 11 2000

  • Next message: Peters James-LJP035: "RE: I-D ACTION:draft-zigmond-tv-url-03.txt"

    Message-ID: <EBEB814746D2D21189840090273F4ADD082897@cbt>
    From: Martin Spamer <>
    To: WWW TV List <>
    Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 11:59:32 -0000
    Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-zigmond-tv-url-03.txt
    Some fundamental limitations identified as early as last summer have still
    not been fixed, this draft should not have been published until these issues
    have been resolved.
    1) This proposal only supports the broadcast model, it provides no support
    for the increasingly important on-demand model; a workable TV URI scheme
    requires support for BOTH content and broadcast addressing.
    The removal of channel numbers is unjustified, it is not obsolete.  Most DTV
    consumers select by channel number either directly or channel  +/-, many do
    not even use menus, very few will ever use a URI.  Devices using this scheme
    are aimed at end consumers where usability is perhaps the more important
    >The channel numbers generally correspond to tuning frequencies in the
    various national broadcast frequency standards; for example, "tv:4" in the
    United states would be found at 66 MHz.*
    This is supposed to be an international standard, not a US standard.  If
    channel numbering in the US is fixed to a specific radio frequency, (which I
    find difficult to believe) channel numbering should be included on a
    "should" or "may" basis.  Current limitations should not be reason to
    cripple this standard.  We should be aim for an ideal.
    Martin Spamer
    Senior Software Engineer
    Kingston Vision LTD
    Phone +44 (0) 1482 602 670
    Fax +44 (0) 01482 602 899
    <> <> 
    	-----Original Message-----
    	From:	Dan Zigmond []
    	Sent:	Monday, January 10, 2000 9:19 PM
    	To:	WWW TV List
    	Subject:	FW: I-D ACTION:draft-zigmond-tv-url-03.txt
    	The most recent draft of the "tv:" URI specification is now
    available on the
    	IETF Web site.  The details are below.  I believe this incorporates
    all of
    	the input I have received to date.