- From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:00:48 +0200
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: Bernhard Haslhofer <bernhard.haslhofer@univie.ac.at>, public-media-fragment@w3.org, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>, Simon Rainer <Rainer.Simon@ait.ac.at>
On 8 sep 2010, at 02:51, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > I have, however, a pretty big caveat with standardising this approach: right now we are discussing with the browser vendors on how to present spatial media fragment URIs. There is a preference to use them for splicing pictures, i.e. for rendering only the referenced image or video region. > > I do not believe that matches your intentions here. IIUC your intentions here are to only have a means to provide annotations to regions. I think this is more of a "image map" type approach than an "image splicing" approach - correct me if I'm wrong. We've got to be careful here: browser vendors tend to think that the whole world revolves around the browser:-) A media fragment is basically nothing more than a specification of a portion of a video (audio, image) resource, and even though we give guidelines on how to present such a fragment in the browser that doesn't mean it's the only application of media fragments. I would assume that the Media Annotation folks couldn't care less about presentation: they just want to be able to point at something inside the video. -- 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, 8 September 2010 09:01:33 UTC