- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 08:29:39 +1000
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 8:21 AM, David Singer <singer at apple.com> wrote: > At 8:02 ?+1000 8/04/09, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >> >> Note that in the Media Fragment working group even the specification >> of http://www.example.com/t.mov#time="10s-20s" may mean that only the >> requested 10s clip is delivered, especially if all the involved >> instances in the exchange understand media fragment URIs. During a >> transition period, while the infrastructure does not support media >> fragment URIs yet, the full resource will be delivered and it is up to >> the UA to deal with the consequences. It could either terminate the >> connection and decide that the resource is too long to accept and >> report an error to the user. Or it could receive the full resource, >> but decide to just play back the requested segment. Since ultimately >> the aim is to have only the requested clip downloaded, I think the UI >> presentation should be identical to the one where a query is used. >> >> BTW: the media fragment WG will make suggestions as to what a UA >> should do, but ultimately every application may have its own >> motivations for what to display, so you will not see definite >> specifications for what a UA is supposed to do UI-wise with media >> fragments. Think, e.g., about a playlist that consists of fragments >> from multiple Web resources (including different servers). Such a >> mash-up should probably best be represented with on continuous >> timeline that overrides the original timing of each clip. Only when >> you drill into the clip will you actually get the original in and out >> times. > > Ah, OK. ?I agree that telling UAs what they should do, ought to be for the > most part, out of scope. ?But if there is material that the page author does > NOT want to have shown, they probably need to know whether the # syntax will > assure them that the user is restricted. (Always understanding that if they > copy-paste the URL, neitehr # nor ? syntax stops them from changing the > selection range). ?Think of presenting a K-12 class with a clip from a > movie... > > My mental analogy was HTML, where an acnhor takes you to that part of the > page as a convenience, but nothing stops you from navigating away. ?And in > the case where the UA optimizes for showing that section (by suitable > handshakes/translations with the server), again, it could present a UI which > offers other times -- at the expense of more handshakes. Yes, I understand that analogy. But because video can be a very long resource, media fragment URIs cannot be restriced to client-side offsetting. Think e.g. about wanting the last 2 minutes out of a 5 hour discussion downloaded to your mobile phone. The media fragment WG decided that fragment addressing should be done with "#" and be able to just deliver the actual fragment. (BTW: this is in contrast to the temporal URIs that were specified for Annodex, where chopping happened in the UA for "#" and on the server for "?"). Cheers, Silvia.
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2009 15:29:39 UTC