- From: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 18:19:20 +0200
- To: DENOUAL Franck <Franck.Denoual@crf.canon.fr>
- CC: Media Fragments Working Group WG <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear Frank, Thanks for your inputs! Indeed, we need to carefully specify how Range requests are handled when multiple dimensions are used. I have added this item on our upcoming F2F meeting, that will be virtual [1]. By the way, we will have the same policy for this virtual F2F meeting, i.e. open to observers. Will you or other representatives from Canon be available on Thursday 17/09 and Friday 18/09 (10:00-12:00 CET) for tele-conferencing? > It seems that for simple temporal fragments, the "instance-length" > field of the Content-Range header will do the job. But if you > consider a Track+Time fragment such as: > http://www.example.com/video.ogv#track='oneTrack'&t=10,20 you > probably would like a display with the duration of "oneTrack" instead > of the duration of "video.ogv". In this case, you'd probably need > something like the "Content-Fragment" header from Conrad's proposal > [1] extended with an "fragment-length" parameter : Content-Range: > time 00:10-00:20 Content-Fragment: track='oneTrack'/50 where 50 is > the track duration (we infer a duration using range-unit info). Is it really reasonable to assume that the tracks will not have all the same duration (i.e. the duration of the whole video)? Is it unreasonable to claim that the semantics of #t=10,20&track='oneTrack' is: "I want an excerpt of this video from the second 10 till the second 20 and I want just the track entitled 'oneTrack' during this time range? And by our spec: #t=10,20&track='oneTrack' and #track='oneTrack'&t=10,20 should return the same thing ... > For fragments combining track + spatial, > http://www.example.com/video.ogv#track='oneTrack'&xywh=12,12,96,96 > the server could send: Content-Range: xywh=10,10,100,100 > Content-Fragment: track='oneTrack'/128,128 where 'oneTrack' is a low > resolution version (128*128 instead of 256*256). Here, the client is > aware that "128,128" corresponds to a resolution since range-unit = > xywh. Like Yves said, given that spatial addressing usually requires transcoding, we might serve it as a sub-resource (?) rather than a pure fragment (#). More to come ... stay tuned :-) Cheers. Raphaël [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/FourthF2FAgenda -- Raphaël Troncy EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department 2229, route des Crêtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France. e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242 Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200 Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Wednesday, 2 September 2009 16:20:14 UTC