- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:21:41 +1000
- To: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
All, in particular Yves, I just came across an interesting problem in our spec. In section 4.3.1 we have an example: t=10, # => results in the time interval [10,end) But our production rule states: npttimedef = [ deftimeformat ":"] ( npttime [ "," npttime ] ) / ( "," npttime ) Making this a invalid specification. I don't think we want this, since there is not really a difference between t=10 and t=10, Thus I suggest to adapt the production rule to: npttimedef = [ deftimeformat ":"] ( npttime [ "," npttime ] ) / ( "," npttime ) / ( npttime ",") Cheers, Silvia. On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/4/7 Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>: >> >>> 10, 11 and 12 have to be diversified based on whether a lies before or >>> after the beginning of the media resource. In fact, we need to >>> introduce something like s=start time and e=end time everywhere. Thus >>> we need to adapt/introduce the following: >>> >>> no5: t=a,b with s<=a, a<b, b<=e => play a to b >>> introduce no5a: t=a,b with a<s, a<b, s<b, b<=e => play s to b >>> introduce no5b: t=a,b with a<s, a<b, b<s, b<=e => empty fragment >>> (these include no6 now) >>> >>> no7: t=a,b with s<=a, a<b, a<e, b>e => play a to e >>> no7a: t=a,b with a<s, a<b, a<e, b>e => play s to e >>> no7b: t=a,b with a<b, a=>e, b>e => empty fragment >>> (this last one includes no8 and no9) >>> >>> no10: t=a, with a>=s, a<e => play a to e >>> no10a: t=a, with a<s, a<e => play s to e >>> >>> no14: t=,a with a>s, a< d => play s to a >>> no14a: t=,a with a<=s, a<d => empty fragment >> >> OK, so for all these test cases, you assume fairly that the start time of a >> media resource is not necessarily 0. Is this a frequent case? How many media >> files out there have this property? > > It doesn't matter how many exist, but that this case can occur. Thus > we have to cover it in the test case. > > >>> Yup, listed above as a/b numbers and additional conditions to the ones >>> in the existing list. Mostly related to missing out on defining the >>> "start" time of the resource. >> >> I would add all these ones if the group feels it is necessary, i.e. there >> _are_ videos that will fall in these cases. > > > Yes, there definitely will be. The first media fragment server that > provides media fragment queries will create such resources. As we > encourage people to implement such services, we should also provide > for the possibility that such files will exist. Even if only 0.1% of > all files that now exist have that property. > > Cheers, > Silvia. >
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 02:22:34 UTC