Re: Results of the media type review regarding fragment identifier (semantics)

Silvia,

> I was under the impression that both MPEG7 and MPEG21 registered the
> fragment syntax together with the MIME type, but obviously they
> didn't. 

Well, as I said, looking at the IANA registry I was not able to find an
indication for this. We should peradventure ping them and ask if they did
(in some non-standard way, dunno?) or does the WG think this might be
counter-productive and just open a can of worms?

> Ogg/temporal URI only has an expired I-D for this. YouTube,
> Google and the other Web 2.0 sites that provide temporal media
> fragment addressing just simply provide it as a feature without
> registring it.

Yes. Again, I was just looking at the paper-trail part. Obviously there are
formats out there that practically do so. This is now the second step and I
guess we have in the SOTA already a good overview whom to approach regarding
this.

The only thing I'm saying here is essentially: from a *standardisation*
point of view (IANA, IETF, W3C) it *seems* we have no clashes so far.

> Also please note that RTP/RTSP, while specifying protocol methods for
> addressing time offsets, have left the URI syntax specification to the
> server, see http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2326.txt (search for
> "fragment"). I have just added that information to
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/State_of_the_Art .
> [Davy/Erik: you might want to add this to the WD].

No you find me confused a bit. RFC2326 is not referenced from the IANA
registry AFAIK. Would you mind adding a note to [1], if you think this
changes anything on the finding itself?

Cheers,
      Michael

[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/MediaTypeReview

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
National University of Ireland, Lower Dangan,
Galway, Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://sw-app.org/about.html
http://webofdata.wordpress.com/


> From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 14:56:39 +1000
> To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
> Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Results of the media type review regarding fragment identifier
> (semantics)
> 
> Interesting indeed.
> 
> I was under the impression that both MPEG7 and MPEG21 registered the
> fragment syntax together with the MIME type, but obviously they
> didn't. Ogg/temporal URI only has an expired I-D for this. YouTube,
> Google and the other Web 2.0 sites that provide temporal media
> fragment addressing just simply provide it as a feature without
> registring it.
> 
> Also please note that RTP/RTSP, while specifying protocol methods for
> addressing time offsets, have left the URI syntax specification to the
> server, see http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2326.txt (search for
> "fragment"). I have just added that information to
> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/State_of_the_Art .
> [Davy/Erik: you might want to add this to the WD].
> 
> I agree that we should send letters to all the stakeholders that we
> have identified and encourage them to use the current specification
> under development, also encouraging them to give us feedback if they
> come across any issues.
> 
> Cheers,
> Silvia.
> 
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Michael Hausenblas
> <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> wrote:
>> All,
>> 
>> As of my actions [1] and  [2] regarding our ISSUE-3 I have now performed the
>> review of the IANA media types registry. The question was how many media
>> types in the audio-visual domain exist that define fragment identifiers and
>> if so, where potential clashes with our proposed syntax/semantics exist.
>> 
>> Short answer: 0.
>> Long answer: see my write-up at the Wiki [3]
>> 
>> I'm gonna close my actions now and move on with initiating the Test Cases.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>>      Michael
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/42
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/47
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/MediaTypeReview
>> 
>> --
>> Dr. Michael Hausenblas
>> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>> National University of Ireland, Lower Dangan,
>> Galway, Ireland, Europe
>> Tel. +353 91 495730
>> http://sw-app.org/about.html
>> http://webofdata.wordpress.com/
>> 
>> 
>>

Received on Sunday, 19 April 2009 08:06:53 UTC