W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > March 2014

Re: Transition to REC for "API for Media Resources 1.0".

From: Joakim Soderberg <soderberg.pj@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 10:51:13 -0800
Cc: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>, Florian Stegmaier <florian.stegmaier@uni-passau.de>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>, Joakim Soderberg <j.soderberg@samsung.com>
Message-Id: <6CC60C72-D636-492B-9300-5A25C3D71496@gmail.com>
To: Werner Bailer <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
I think the suggested title is an improvement.

On 01 Mar 2014, at 07:30, Bailer, Werner <werner.bailer@joanneum.at> wrote:

> Hi Thierry,
> 
> thanks, good news !
> 
> No objection to the title change.
> 
> Best regards,
> Werner
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> Von: Thierry MICHEL [tmichel@w3.org]
> Gesendet: Samstag, 01. März 2014 12:51
> An: Florian Stegmaier; public-media-annotation@w3.org; Bailer, Werner; Joakim Soderberg
> Betreff: Transition  to REC for "API for Media Resources 1.0".
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This is to let you know that the W3C Director has approuved to move "API
> for Media Resources 1.0" to REC  [1]
> 
> yes finally ;-)))
> 
> Remains a small issue, before publishing the REC.
> 
> The Director is sympathetic  with the suggestion from a W3C member
> during the PR review, to add the word  "Metadata" to the beginning of
> the title, as he says that indeed it makes it clearer.
> " Without qualifying "API", it will be confused with other media related
> API functionality."
> 
> So the question is:
> 
> Who from the MAWG would disapprove the change of Title ?
> from
> "API for Media Resources 1.0"
> to
> "Metadata API for Media Resources 1.0"
> 
> If there are no objection by next friday, I will request publication of
> this spec as REC.
> 
> Thierry
> 
> 
>  [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/API10/REC/
> 
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 1 March 2014 18:51:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:24:54 UTC