RE: add zip to SMIL 3.0 players

The other containers were not created by the SYMM group.

The main beneficiaries of a SMIL 3 Language profile zip would be 
Ambulant and Helix/RealPlayer. And everybody on the net :)

Is it feasible to ask Ambulant and Helix/RealPlayer developers to work
together to create a SMIL zip container?

jose

Web 1 HTML
Web 2 SMIL

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: add zip to SMIL 3.0 players
From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Date: Sat, October 18, 2008 1:38 pm
To: Jose Ramirez <jose@multimedia4everyone.com>
Cc: www-smil@w3.org

I agree that a container definition would be beneficial but it's not
something you can graft on in a couple of days.


For one thing, people will want containers for many different reasons.
For example, MMS uses containers because they want to ship the media
with the SMIL presentation. They didn't really care about size (their
SMIL files are tiny), so they decided to use mime-multipart like
containers.


Daisy books, on the other hand, sometimes have immense SMIL files (one
guy I know always talks about this dictionary or encyclopedia that gives
no end to problems because of its size). These will probably want each
of the SMIL files to be zipped separately, so a rader doesn't have to
unzip a whole encyclopedia, only the index and the relevant chapter.


If the SYMM group defined one standard container format it would  likely
do more damage than good, unless all the use cases were studied and
catered for.

In the mean time, if someone want to register mimetype
application/x-zip+xml+smil (if that's allowable syntax:-): go ahead. The
magic of HTTP should even allow server-side decoding for clients that
don't understand it.
 --
 Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
 If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma
Goldman

Received on Saturday, 18 October 2008 21:34:11 UTC