- From: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:32:32 +0200
- To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear all, There were *just* Yves and I today on the call. So we have obviously a problem of time slot if nobody can make the telecon. There has been the switch to Daylight Saving time for Europe and USA but now, Conrad and Silvia have the telecon one hour earlier which is not convenient for them. I would like to change the telecon time so that _everybody_ can make it! Please, send me either publicly or privately your hard constraint for having telecon on Wednesday so I can figure out which is the good timeslot. Nothing has happened since the F2F and we need to move on. Yves has 3 outstanding actions (123, 152 and 154) that he would have completed by next Tuesday (despite the fact is on holidays). I will make a full pass on the document on Tuesday night and I would like we decide to publish a new WD on Wednesday during the telecon so that the document can be published on Thursday 08/04/2010. Wednesday will therefore be your chance to have a motivated objection for not publishing but let's hope you will not have one :-) Among the issues that would be hopefully resolved before the next publication: - ACTION-152: Yves will add back the media segment production and complete the grammar. All the constraints cannot be expressed formally, so we will have a paragraph that explain in natural language what are these additional constraints. There is also the pseudo-algorithm from Philip that helps clarifying things. All that must read smoothly. Note Philip that Yves attended the IRI F2F meeting and that there is outstanding issues when parsing the media fragment URI current syntax with the name dimension if the value use strange characters just to know which part of the URI is encoded how. So there might be problem with your pseudo algorithm, Yves might give more details. - ACTION-123: Yves will add a first stab as ABNF syntax for the headers. However, we do have an outstanding issue with the so-called Range-Equivalent header. Apparently, we cannot add new headers if we issue a Range request, and have a 206 Partial Response ... which means, the equivalence between bytes and another unit must be encoded into the Content-Range and we need to work out the exact syntax! - ACTION-154: Yves will add a 4th recipe in the document, where the request is expressed in a custom unit such as second, and the answer is expressed in seconds too. Cheers. Raphaël -- 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.eurecom.fr/~troncy/
Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 09:34:02 UTC