W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > July to September 2000

Re: SYMM WG comments on XBase 2nd last call

From: Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 21:15:25 +0200
To: Patrick Schmitz <pschmitz@microsoft.com>
Cc: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "'Lloyd Rutledge'" <Lloyd.Rutledge@cwi.nl>, "'www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>, "'symm@w3.org'" <symm@w3.org>, "'Paul Grosso'" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Message-ID: <20000705211525.B22413@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 10:55:39AM -0700, Patrick Schmitz wrote:
> Thanks for the reference Lloyd, but I think you've summarized the use-cases
> very well. My feelings about the issue are based upon my experience with web
> authors and web site management, especially when dealing with media assets.
> The ability to collect different assets into respective areas of the web
> server tree was a common request. In one animation runtime we actually
> implemented something very much like the multiple XBase solution described
> in this thread, based upon customer requests.

  The solution I suggested to Lloyd when we discussed last week in Grenoble
was to use xml:base for non-audio and non-video resources, and possibly
use an ad-hoc mechanism for audio and video.
  The goal would be to allow early experience with the existing simple
base mechanism using generic tools which may know how to handle non
streaming media. That's where the standardizing is the most crucial,
allowing reuse by non-specific (possibly non SMIL aware generic XML
toolkits).

> It is my sense that if we (SYMM) are to include xbase functionality, we
> should provide a multiple  base solution.  At the same time, I would not try
> to move heaven and earth to make this happen for SMIL 2.0.  At some point,
> we have to cut off feature requests.  Perhaps the Real folks can comment on
> whether they have lots of requests for this.

  So in the event that integration of multiple bases is not 
included in XML Base 1.0, will the SYMM WG reuse the xml:base mechanism
for non-streaming media ?

> Bottom line for the XBase folks: If and when we (SYMM) support this
> functionality, I doubt that the single xbase solution will suffice.

  understood,

> As such,
> sooner or later, I think XBase will have to address this. If you defer this
> until a later version, then you will either see slower adoption, or you may
> find your hands tied by earlier ad hoc implementations of the functionality.
> I understand that you also want to cut off XBase 1.0 - I am just describing
> that essential conflict we all face - provide a solution now, or live with
> other people's (possibly bad) solutions.

  What will prevent the SYMM WG from adopting xml:base for the 
non-streaming class of media that most XML toolkits will be able to handle
without a-priori knowledge of SMIL or support for continuous medias
(like a generic XML browser or a Web robot) ? Is there something
in the current XML Base WD which would make it's use difficult for
this class of media ?

Daniel

-- 
Daniel.Veillard@w3.org | W3C, INRIA Rhone-Alpes  | Today's Bookmarks :
Tel : +33 476 615 257  | 655, avenue de l'Europe | Linux XML libxml WWW
Fax : +33 476 615 207  | 38330 Montbonnot FRANCE | Gnome rpm2html rpmfind
 http://www.w3.org/People/all#veillard%40w3.org  | RPM badminton Kaffe
Received on Wednesday, 5 July 2000 15:15:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:40 GMT