- From: Avaro Olivier <olivier.avaro@cnet.francetelecom.fr>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:18:54 +0900
- To: Larry Bouthillier <lbouthillier@hbs.edu>
- CC: www-smil@w3.org
Hi Larry, Cliff, Thanks for your feed back on the interest of a text version of the language and you maybe right. More comments : 1- What was true for "simple" web text based page, won't be true for more complex content including text, graphics, time based media, ... I have difficulties to imagine that people will do e.g. their animations based on the text version ... I would like to do this at a higher level, with the possibility to go down to a text version for part of the scene. 2- The point made by Cliff on the protection of content is a key issue. No one will provide serious content if it is not seriously protected. We are tackling this issue in MPEG-4 for a while now, and may the tools we are developing can be useful in this context. 3- Another point made by Cliff concerns the application engine. SMIL, like MPEG-4 Version 1, but with a more narrow scope, defines a presentation engine. This presentation must be completed by an application engine, what we call MPEG-J (J for Java) in MPEG-4 Version 2. I agree with Cliff that the choice of the application engine should be made carefully and based on already established standards. My prefered choice follow Cliff ones. KInd regards, Olivier
Received on Monday, 22 June 1998 16:20:18 UTC