- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 15:04:27 PST
- To: <fin@finseth.com>
- Cc: <Philipp.Hoschka@sophia.inria.fr>, <www-tv@w3.org>
I think it fails the 'is it well defined?' test. What would you do with something that has two tuners, for example. Which one is the "current" TV channel? If I get a TV URL on my PC over the web, but I have a TV tuner on my PC, am I supposed to use the TV tuner's current image? Since it's the TV-of-the-device? Why not just have a locator that is "context:" whose meaning is determined by the context of the document that embeds it. It could be a private negotiation. I don't see any reason why "tv:" adds any information, since there's no actual information about the data located. Larry -- http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter > -----Original Message----- > From: fin@visi.com [mailto:fin@visi.com]On Behalf Of Craig A. Finseth > Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 2:46 PM > To: masinter@parc.xerox.com > Cc: Philipp.Hoschka@sophia.inria.fr > Subject: about tv: > > > I have been participating in the W3C-URL and the ATSC working groups > relating to URI/L/N usage. > > It has been mentioned (by me and others) that the "tv:" usage in the > Web TV URL scheme (not the "tv:#" or "tv:name", just the "tv:" usage > itself) does not "qualify" as a URL scheme because it does not identify > a globally unique resource. > > Everyone that I know of agrees that the function is useful. (The > function being "put the current TV image in the background and/or a > corner of the screen.) > > Phil Hoschka referred me to you on this question. He also suggested > copying www-tv@w3.org on your reply. > > Craig >
Received on Wednesday, 10 February 1999 18:04:37 UTC