- From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 06:01:01 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- cc: www-tag@w3.org, public-media-fragment@w3.org
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote: > Just some random comments: > > - Whether transcoding is needed or not will depend on whether the server has > prestored a certain piece of the big picture or not. Looks like it's purely > server-internal. Unless the big pictures is made of tiles and served with a format using those tiles, what's on the server side is completely opaque. In the example I gave, I used jpeg to avoid the tiles aspect. > - Content-Range seems to be hard-coded to "bytes", no other unit is usable. > (see RFC 2616, 14.16). Julian already answered :) > - For a jpeg image, because of the lossiness of the coding and the numeric > inaccuracy of the transforms used, it may not be possible to reconstruct the > bit-by-bit exact equivalent image from covering parts. Yes, that's the point. Is the bit-by-bit exact reconstruction really mandatory/needed/desirable? I can imagine something like GET /earthmap.jpg HTTP/1.1 Host: www.example.com -> HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: image/jpeg ETag: foo GET /earthmap.jpg HTTP/1.1 Host: www.example.com Range: pixel-crop xywh=5160,5120,32,24 (this is entirely made up) -> HTTP/1.1 206 Partial Content Content-Type: image/jpeg ETag: W/foo Content-Range: pixel-crop=5132,5100,64,64 Note the weak etag here to signal the possible loss of bit-by-bit equivalence during transcoding. > On 2009/06/30 23:26, Yves Lafon wrote: >> All, >> The Media Fragment WG is working on... defining how to identify and >> server media fragments, the primary use case is of course video, but it >> is not limited to it [1]. There is a aso a clear relation to the TAG WD >> "Usage Patterns For Client-Side URI parameters" [2], as hash parameters >> are used to generate range requests to send back to the clients only the >> desired sub-part of the resource representation. >> >> There are different axis defined, the most obvious and easy to handle is >> the time axis for video and audio, as in most cases the sub-part >> extraction can be done in the compressed domain. >> >> The geometrical axis (like asking for a clipped version of a picture or >> a video) is the origin of this email, as the WG did not reach a >> conclusion on "Is it legal to do transcoding when serving a fragment". >> >> ie: the World Map is defined by http://www.example.com/earthmap.jpg and >> is a 10000x10000 picture. >> Small country M is defined by the following URI: >> http://www.example.com/earthmap.jpg#xywh=pixel:5160,5120,32,24 >> >> Suppose that we have a way to construct a ranged request out of that, >> serving only that 32x34 jpg file requires transcoding, while being >> served as a partial response. >> >> Input needed :) >> Thanks, >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-media-frags-reqs-20090430/ >> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-hash-in-uri-20090415/ >> > > -- Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras. ~~Yves
Received on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 10:01:12 UTC