- From: Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:17:30 +0200
- To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org, "Russell Berkoff" <r.berkoff@sisa.samsung.com>
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:51:04 +0200, Russell Berkoff <r.berkoff@sisa.samsung.com> wrote: > Hello, > > > It appears that some of use-cases have been submitted that appear to > address scenarios already considered in UPnP. > > > Any suggestions on the best way to resolve this? > Hi Russell, good point you raise here My take on this: # If we agree on this template <http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Use_Cases_Template> would be good that submitted usecases are re-written according to it. # Independently from the template, for each use case we have to answer these questions - Why were you not able to use only existing standards to accomplish this? - What might you suggest could be standardized? # Identifying that some usecases are already covered by existing technology is also a possible outcome of this TF work, so if this is the case we should identify this coverage and document it. This is also mentioned in the TF charter draft (that we will discuss today) <http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Charter#Deliverables> Note though that having another technology already covering a usecase is not a reason to automatically drop any proposal of work to be done in W3C. Of course if an existing technology already exist, there should be a good reason to do the work "again". The goal of this TF is exactly to discuss these issues. In order to easy the discussion, I would encourage you to point out which usecases are already well covered by which part of UPnP (pointing to existing public specifications). Note that the lack of open standards addressing a particular use case could also be a reason to motivate some work to be done (but this is not a rule, so it needs to be discussed on a case by case base) What is the opinion of other participants on this? /g > > Regards, > > Russell Berkoff > > Samsung Electronics > > > From: public-web-and-tv-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-web-and-tv-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Russell Berkoff > Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 3:38 PM > To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org > Subject: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] UPnP AV 4th Revision (UPnP AV-4) > > > | Updated Subject line for HOME_NETWORK_TF, > > | Fixed minor typo. > > > Hello, > > > I should mention that there is a new UPnP revision that has completed > UPnP member reviews and is in the process of final editing. UPnP AV-4 > includes a number of features which may be of interest to Web and TV: > > > This is a brief overview of AV-4 features: > > > · Metadata Properties Additions > > o Metadata properties to create lists of (logically) related content > items. > > o Metadata properties to describe time-shift buffered content. > > o Metadata properties to describe content privacy (User-identity based > content metadata access). > > o Metadata properties to describe non-multiplex content (AV content > with separate audio, subtitle tracks) > > > · Media Server Mode Control > > o Action to command device to enter special modes (single user, > low-power). > > > · Media Renderer Features > > o Synchronized Playback (Multi-room audio scenarios, precision clock > source selection) > > o Renderer item information (Playback Item information from renderer: > DRM license parameters, supported playback formats) > > o Enhanced renderer settings (XML-based renderer settings documents) > > o Additional renderer settings > > § Closed caption selection > > § Camera Angle selection > > § PiP selection > > § Audio Track selection (multi-language) > > § Output selection > > § Zoom/Pan > > > Regards, > > Russell Berkoff > > Samsung Electronics > -- Giuseppe Pascale TV & Connected Devices Opera Software - Sweden
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 09:18:10 UTC