Re: iPhone streaming Internet-Draft posted

On May 4, 2009, at 5:21 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> I had a quick look over this. My impression was that the  
> relationship to HTTP is pretty tangental; i.e., you may only intend  
> to use this over HTTP, but there's not much (anything?) HTTP- 
> specific about it.
> As such, it may be better to position this as a format description  
> (or indeed a description of an extension to an existing format),  
> rather than something HTTP-specific. E.g., a good name might be  
> 'Live Streaming Extensions for the M3U Playlist Format.'

Hello Mark. Sorry it took so long to get back to you on this.

The reason we published the draft was to encourage the production of  
interoperable implementations. Similarly, we restrict our protocol to  
HTTP because more generality makes it too difficult to guarantee  

Because of this we believe that it is important that HTTP appear in  
the title of the draft. But I agree that we should avoid the  
appearance of endorsement by the HTTP standards bodies, so it makes  
sense to consider a different title.

How about live-media-streaming-over-http?


Received on Sunday, 2 August 2009 19:46:20 UTC