- From: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:05:29 +0100
- To: Davy Van Deursen <davy.vandeursen@ugent.be>
- Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>, Erik Mannens <erik.mannens@ugent.be>, yl2@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Hi Davy, all, > First of all, I noticed a mismatch in the spec between [1] and [2]. In [1], > npt-mmss is defined, while in [2], it is not. The group decided to make the > hours optional (see also ACTION-191 [3]); hence the extension to RFC2326. > However, this should be corrected in [2]. Note that in both cases > (npt-hhmmss and npt-mmss), the trailing dot is allowed. Thanks for the clarification. So we extend an RFC :-) Not sure this is a good thing, but the group decided so in the past, so I will not argue. The important point is that trailing dots are explicitly allowed, so the parser should (and will) allow it. > Knowing this, TC0080-UA and TC0081-UA should be marked as valid media > fragments according to the spec (which is at least how I interpret it :)). Yes. As legal as it gets :-) > If no one objects, I can perform the changes (in both the spec and the test > cases). +1 for the proposed changes. Best, Tom -- Thomas Steiner, Research Scientist, Google Inc. http://blog.tomayac.com, http://twitter.com/tomayac
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2011 10:06:29 UTC