- From: Jacco van Ossenbruggen <jrvosse@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:02:16 +0200
- To: JP Morgenthal <jp@ncfocus.com>
- CC: www-smil@w3.org
> The utility of SMIL is diminshed greatly by the fact that it does not > have a standard method for inline representations of audio, video, and > images. There should have been an attribute "mime_type" and an > attribute "local", this way the XML instance could have carried the > entire data set instead of having to create a new connection and > download yet another set of data. HTML has become a success without coding images or video inline. Why would this be different for SMIL? Http 1.1 allows you to get the document, parse the doc while keeping the connection open, download all media items in one single connection, and finally close the connection. Additionally, a large amount of applications will need to make use of streaming protocols such as RTSP to fetch the actual media content. Note that generally, you cannot start playing a SMIL document until you have parsed the document completely. Inlining a large video will drastically delay the moment the document can be started. However, inline encoding can indeed be useful for some applications, and it may be included in future versions of SMIL. And as this problem will also apply to other file formats based on XML, I think a general XML solution would be preferable. I already heard some rumors about an XML archive format, comparable to JAR. Regards, Jacco
Received on Wednesday, 17 June 1998 12:02:18 UTC