- From: Ted Wugofski <Ted.Wugofski@OTMP.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 21:55:08 -0600
- To: "'fin@finseth.com'" <fin@finseth.com>, "'gadams@spyglass.com'" <gadams@spyglass.com>
- Cc: "'tenkate@natlab.research.philips.com'" <tenkate@natlab.research.philips.com>, "'www-tv@w3.org'" <www-tv@w3.org>, "DASE E2E Team (E-mail)" <e-e@toocan.philabs.research.philips.com>
- Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=OTMP%l=MOON1-981117035508Z-2625@moon1.otmp.com>
Craig, I strongly disagree with a solution that requires using the EPG data for resolving a resource. My real-world experience is that the EPG data is not accurate enough for resolving "mission critical" resources (seeing what is on TV tonight is different from autonomous operations). While I do not have objective measurements of the inaccuracy of existing EPG data solutions, I frequently find movies in the EPG that do not correlate with what is on the screen and when programming is delayed (due to press conferences, football games, etc.) I have *never* seen a satellite (much less downloadable) EPG get corrected. Craig, the solution I see being suggested is a good start, but the date/time part of the solution needs to come from somewhere else. The EPG does not support the level of accuracy I think is necessary and it was not designed for the level of granularity we will probably need for resource identification (i.e., a segment of an event). Ted ----- Ted Wugofski Over the Moon Productions (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Gateway) > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig A. Finseth [mailto:fin@finseth.com] > Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 11:01 AM > To: gadams@spyglass.com > Cc: tenkate@natlab.research.philips.com; www-tv@w3.org > Subject: Re: URI Requirements > > > 1. Under your recent URI requirements document, you have: > > Given a URI, it must be possible for > a receiver > to determine the time period(s) within which the resource can be > retrieved from the (also resolved) location. > > Do you intend by this that the information to resolve such a > determination should be present in the URI directly? Or that in > combination with some unspecified higher-level-protocol, > e.g., SAP, SDP, > etc., the URI may be used as a key to resolve such a determination? > > If you mean the former, then this requirement goes beyond the > standard semantics of, say, HTTP URLs, which have no > intrinsic temporal > validity outside of the scope of querying an origin > server, etc., for > the resource and being informed it is no longer present, etc. > > I would suggest that this requirement is an attempt to reconcile the > differences between the nature of TV broadcasting (programs on a > schedule) with the web. > > The approach that makes sense to me is to use an outside protocol (the > EPG data) to resolve the date/time issues. > > 2. Regarding: > > A URI should be resolvable under any of the following > network access conditions: > ... > In HTTP's interpretation of URIs, other resource variation axes are > provided as well: language, content-encoding, etc. Do you > envision these > applying in this context? What other variation axes do you > anticipate? > > Most transfer protocols provide some mechanism to carry the header > information. Thus, whatever versions (as named by headers) the > broadcaster desires can be sent. > > Unlike the regular web, there is no negotiation phase: the broadcaster > makes the sole determination (based on indirect information such as > customer surveys) of what to send. > > Bandwidth and cost factors will also come into play (:-). > > Craig > >
Attachments
- application/octet-stream attachment: Ted_Wugofski__E-mail_.vcf
Received on Monday, 16 November 1998 22:55:41 UTC