- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 18:02:49 +0900
- To: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>, "'Lisa Dusseault'" <lisa@osafoundation.org>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@mnot.net>, "'HTTP Working Group'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
At 18:48 08/08/08, Larry Masinter wrote: > >There is a new W3C working group proposed for working on addressing >and accessing temporal fragments of timed media (video & audio). >One could imagine time ranges that might be independent of the >format. > >On the other hand, I don't understand the reasons that the >JPEG 2000 committee rejected using HTTP range retrieval for >the J2 protocol, instead adopting query parameters in the URLs. >In this case, the range retrieval might look like it was >media independent even though J2 defined it specifically for >JPEG 2000 encoded images. > >It might be worth looking into the reasons for the design >choice in J2. I have no clue, but it could be that one argument for not using ranges is that you cannot expose them in an URI. This means that instead of sending your colleague a mail saying "Look at this interesting snippet: [URI here]" you have to say "Look at this video [URI here], the interesting stuff is at xx:yy:zz into the video". In other words, range, as currently used, is a device for network optimization (e.g. restart of long downloads that failed in the middle), without user-related meaning (users don't count bytes!). Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 09:31:58 UTC