- From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 09:52:57 +0100
- To: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
- Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
On 10 mrt 2009, at 16:28, Raphaël Troncy wrote: > Hi Jack, > >> in the first example (2-way) you make the server return a different >> range than the client requested, and also the range returned was >> nice and ragged. With the second example, with all the nice >> numbers, could something similar be happening too? For a >> documentation point of view it might be a good idea to return those >> same ranges, unless there really is a difference. > > Yes, of course, it is unlikely we get nice round numbers for the > second example too. The main reason is my laziness and the fact that > this all example is anyway staged. > What I would suggest for the sake of documentation is to use a real > media resource (on the jigsaw) server, describe a fragment request > that makes sense for this particular resource, and see what time > ranges (and byte ranges in the 2nd example) are actually returned. > Can someone work on that? Ah, yes!! I recorded a video of you in our Nice meeting, specifically for this purpose! Now the only thing to be done is that I need to remember where it is:-) Probably at home, I'll check. Ah, no, of course, it's online. I created the SMIL examples of the state of the art document with it. In <http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/State_of_the_Art > you'll find not only the video, but also relevant in- and out- points. Feel free to copy the media to somewhere else, and convert it to ogv or whatever. -- Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 08:53:37 UTC