- From: Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:24:32 +0100
- To: "Dewa, Yoshiharu (OSAKI)" <Yoshiharu.Dewa@jp.sony.com>, "Vickers, Mark" <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com>, "John Simmons" <johnsim@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Jan Lindquist" <jan.lindquist@ericsson.com>, "public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 02:21:33 +0100, John Simmons <johnsim@microsoft.com> wrote: > I suggest it would be helpful to agree on the scope section of this > document, and then pick a title that accurately reflects that scope. > > Below is the scope as it is today. The first two bullets are really the > scope. The following two paragraphs are there for clarification. > > I believe the scope should be more precise - instead of "set of > languages" it should state something about "profiles of W3C > specifications". And I believe it should be specific about video > services. > Could you provide some alternative text? Thanks, /g > Once this is boiled down to one hard paragraph, the clarification > paragraphs can go away and the title will declare itself. > > John > ================================================================== > The scope of this document is limited to: > > - provide references to a set of languages that shall be supported by > devices and can be used by content and service providers to author > content and services to be presented to the end user. > > - provide references to a set of metrics that can be used to evaluate > performances of devices > > The scope of this document is not to describe an entire operating > system. In particular, hardware and software configuration that user > would be expected to have on their devices are out of scope. > > The scope of this document is not to describe a unique end-to-end > delivery system. In particular, mandating a specific end-to-end network > configuration (including network protocols, video codecs, video > streaming technologies and so on) is out of scope for this document. > Nonetheless this document may describe how some specific technologies > may be combined together in order to provide a functional TV service. > ======================================================================= > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dewa, Yoshiharu (OSAKI) [mailto:Yoshiharu.Dewa@jp.sony.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 4:54 PM > To: Vickers, Mark; Giuseppe Pascale > Cc: Jan Lindquist; public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG > Subject: RE: [profile] Profile spec title > > All, > > I would like to keep some word for CE devices. If it just say > "interactive video services", the baseline for measurement of some > parameters and/or sub setting will rather be vague and the result will > be unpractical. > > Rgs, > -- Yoshiharu > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Vickers, Mark [mailto:Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 3:10 AM >> To: Giuseppe Pascale >> Cc: Jan Lindquist; public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG >> Subject: Re: [profile] Profile spec title >> >> "Web and TV" is very unclear in meaning. We constantly have to explain >> that the Web and TV IG is not limited to TV devices. We shouldn't >> extend this confusion to the profile spec. I believe the profile is >> defining client requirements for displaying video services and so >> "Video Services" should be in the title. >> >> >> On Feb 7, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote: >> >> > Would one of the following title+subtitle address both needs?: >> > >> > "Web and TV profile" >> > Guidelines for integration of interactive video services in a >> browser-based environment >> > >> > "Web and TV guidelines" >> > A profile of HTML5 and other web technologies for interactive video >> services >> > >> > /g >> > On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:58:23 +0100, Jan Lindquist >> <jan.lindquist@ericsson.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> The profile is not only about HTML5 but other W3c standards so it >> >> would >> be misleading to have HTML5 in the title. In the spirit of the IG how >> about "web and TV profile". The name of the profile is not as critical >> as knowing the breadth of the areas it should cover. This profile may >> live for a while and it in the context of the industry attempt to >> influence the work in W3C with a clear list of specs that are being >> used and how they may be used. >> It will become a reference point by other standard groups. By using >> the same name as the IG it can help see the relationship. >> >> Regards, >> >> JanL >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Vickers, Mark [mailto:Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com] >> >>> Sent: den 7 februari 2012 15:24 >> >>> To: Giuseppe Pascale >> >>> Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG >> >>> Subject: Re: [profile] Profile spec title >> >>> >> >>> How about "HTML5 Video Services Profile"? >> >>> >> >>> On Feb 7, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 17:26:40 +0100, Vickers, Mark >> >>> <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> 5. Title: The goal for me is a profile of HTML5 for video >> >>> services. There are two differences with "Web&TV Profile". >> >>> >> - I want to include HTML5 in the title because this is >> >>> HTML5-related >> >>> >> and HTM5-centric >> >>> >> - I don't like including "TV". This continues to cause >> >>> confusion. It is clearer to describe an HTML5 profile for video >> >>> services. >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >>> > I don't have strong opinions on the title but I would note >> >>> the following: >> >>> > - A title should be short ( the subtitle explains a bit >> >>> more what we are doing). >> >>> > - I've tried to use the word "TV services" in the subtitle that >> >>> > is hopefully a bit less confusing (or maybe not?). I have >> >>> > defined this term as >> >>> > >> >>> > "For the purposes of this document a TV service is a >> >>> commercial video service that may include elements of >> >>> interactivity and that provides a coherent user experience. >> >>> > >> >>> > - while this profile is html5 based this is not only about >> >>> html5. I'm not against highlighting the HTML5 centric approach but >> >>> I wouldn't call this "an html5 profile". >> >>> > >> >>> > So in short: I'm fine with your comments but I cannot come >> >>> up with a better title/subtitle. Suggestions are welcome. >> >>> > >> >>> > /g >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> See you on the call. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Thanks, >> >>> >> mav >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> On Feb 6, 2012, at 6:15 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote: >> >>> >> >> >>> >>> One note: the zakim bridge is overbooked. >> >>> >>> So just in case we see that people have problem dialing >> >>> in (in such >> >>> >>> case please login on IRC and let us know) I set-up this >> >>> Opera bridge. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> NOTE: ONLY TO BE USED IF WE SEE THAT ZAKIM DOESN'T WORK >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Phone bridge details: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Conference ID: 33909 >> >>> >>> Start Date and Time: Monday 06.02.2012 17:00:00 CET/CEST >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Bridge Numbers: >> >>> >>> Norway +47 23 69 26 03 >> >>> >>> USA +1 800 201 4229 (Toll-Free) >> >>> >>> Poland (Wroclaw) +48 71 719 6099 >> >>> >>> Poland (Warsaw) +48 22 262 0799 >> >>> >>> Japan +81 3 5435 8394 >> >>> >>> Russia +7 812 448 7876 >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Conference Name: tv profile >> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >> >>> >>> Please contact SysAdmin at +47 23 69 33 60 for assistance. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> /g >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 12:06:15 +0100, Giuseppe Pascale >> >>> <giuseppep@opera.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Here the call details for todays call >> >>> >>>> (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Telco) >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> Schedule: Monday, 16:00Z (=8:00 Pacific, 11:00 Eastern, 17:00 >> >>> >>>> Europe, 01:00 Korea/Japan) >> >>> >>>> Phone: US: +1 617 761 6200 or SIP: zakim@voip.w3.org >> >>> >>>> Conference >> >>> >>>> Code: 26632 IRC channel: #webtv >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> And here the Agenda for todays call: >> >>> >>>> >> (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Agenda_Telco_6/2/2012) >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> * Review of Charter >> >>> >>>> (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Charter) >> >>> >>>> * Call schedule >> >>> >>>> * TF tools (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile) >> >>> >>>> * Process >> >>> >>>> * Initial feedbacks on the draft >> >>> >>>> (http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/tip/tvprofile/tv.html) >> >>> >>>> * AOB >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> /g >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:00:59 +0100, Giuseppe Pascale >> >>> <giuseppep@opera.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>>> Hi all, >> >>> >>>>> the poll [1] is now closed and the winner is... >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> Monday, February 6, 2012 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM UTC >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> In this first call we will discuss the scope of the TV >> >>> profile work, how do we want the group to be organized and >> >>> timeline (if any). >> >>> >>>>> If you have any other topic you want to add to the >> >>> agenda let me know. >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> I'll send around call details ASAP. >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> [1] http://doodle.com/h6rfnkrqyi3uinpi >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> -- >> >>> >>> Giuseppe Pascale >> >>> >>> TV & Connected Devices >> >>> >>> Opera Software >> >>> >>> >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > -- >> >>> > Giuseppe Pascale >> >>> > TV & Connected Devices >> >>> > Opera Software >> >>> >> >>> >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Giuseppe Pascale >> > TV & Connected Devices >> > Opera Software >> >> > > > -- Giuseppe Pascale TV & Connected Devices Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 08:27:56 UTC