- From: Roger Pantos <rpantos@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 12:45:39 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, http-live-streaming-review <http-live-streaming-review@group.apple.com>, "Travis W. Brown" <travis@apple.com>, Steve Sinclair <steve.sinclair@apple.com>
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 interoperability. 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? Roger.
Received on Sunday, 2 August 2009 19:46:20 UTC