The second W3C Web and TV workshop was held from February 8th-9th, 2011 in Berlin, Germany. The agenda was packed with interesting topics including use cases, adaptive HTTP streaming, content protection, metadata, HTML5, accessibility, and testing. Also others reported on the topic already.
I could not attend this meeting but I followed the Twitter stream #w3ctv which revealed some interesting thoughts from George and Alexander (cf. also screenshots) concerning the adopting of MPEG DASH for W3C WebTV. Alexander, I don't know whether a mug of hot tea helps here...
In general I think that DASH would just work for W3C WebTV and concerning royalties I'd like to quote from the minutes, "it needs to be clear that it is the companies that we have to ask, not the SDOs" - I fully agree [the minutes of the workshop (in usual W3C style) are available here (day #1) and here (day #2)].
In this context it's probably worth reading the following article describing Microsofts approach of "undoing Chrome's AVC (aka H.264) omission". I'm personally wondering what is better, having technology available as open source/royalty free but controlled by a single evil/not evil - whatever you prefer - entity (company) or paying license fees but having clear rules for joining/playing the game of developing and maintaining (corrigenda, amendment) a standard. I'd love to read your comments, feedback, and suggestions ...
Topics of this blog are related to multimedia communication. In particular, streaming of multimedia content within heterogeneous environments enabling Universal Multimedia Experience (UME).
Showing posts with label web. Show all posts
Showing posts with label web. Show all posts
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
Watching Video over the Web
... to start 2011 with some interesting articles, I'd like to share with you two articles from IEEE Internet Computing entitled "Watching Video over the Web" written by Ali Begen, Tankut Akgul, and Mark Baugher.
Part I: Streaming Protocols
Abstract: A U.S. consumer watches TV for about five hours a day on average. While the majority of viewed content is still the broadcast TV programming, the share of the time‐shifted content has been ever increasing. One third of the U.S. consumers currently use a digital video recorder (DVR)‐like device for time‐shifting, however, the trends are showing that more and more consumers are going to the Web to watch their favorite shows and movies on a computer or mobile device. Increasingly, the Web is coming to the digital TV, which incorporates movie downloads and streaming using Web protocols. In this first part of a two‐part article, the authors describe both conventional and emerging streaming solutions using Web and non‐Web protocols and provide a detailed comparison.
Citation: Ali Begen, Tankut Akgul, Mark Baugher, "Watching Video over the Web, Part I: Streaming Protocols," IEEE Internet Computing, 22 Dec. 2010. IEEE computer Society Digital Library. IEEE Computer Society, http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MIC.2010.155
Part II: Applications, Standardization and Open Issues
Abstract: In this second part of a two-part article, the authors look into applications for streaming including end-to-end mobile and in-home streaming, contrasting adaptive approaches to other video delivery paradigms, discuss the current standardization efforts and highlight the areas that still require further research and investigation.
Citation: Ali Begen, Tankut Akgul, Mark Baugher, "Watching Video over the Web, Part II: Applications, Standardization and Open Issues," IEEE Internet Computing, 22 Dec. 2010. IEEE computer Society Digital Library. IEEE Computer Society, http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MIC.2010.156
Part I: Streaming Protocols
Abstract: A U.S. consumer watches TV for about five hours a day on average. While the majority of viewed content is still the broadcast TV programming, the share of the time‐shifted content has been ever increasing. One third of the U.S. consumers currently use a digital video recorder (DVR)‐like device for time‐shifting, however, the trends are showing that more and more consumers are going to the Web to watch their favorite shows and movies on a computer or mobile device. Increasingly, the Web is coming to the digital TV, which incorporates movie downloads and streaming using Web protocols. In this first part of a two‐part article, the authors describe both conventional and emerging streaming solutions using Web and non‐Web protocols and provide a detailed comparison.
Citation: Ali Begen, Tankut Akgul, Mark Baugher, "Watching Video over the Web, Part I: Streaming Protocols," IEEE Internet Computing, 22 Dec. 2010. IEEE computer Society Digital Library. IEEE Computer Society, http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MIC.2010.155
Part II: Applications, Standardization and Open Issues
Abstract: In this second part of a two-part article, the authors look into applications for streaming including end-to-end mobile and in-home streaming, contrasting adaptive approaches to other video delivery paradigms, discuss the current standardization efforts and highlight the areas that still require further research and investigation.
Citation: Ali Begen, Tankut Akgul, Mark Baugher, "Watching Video over the Web, Part II: Applications, Standardization and Open Issues," IEEE Internet Computing, 22 Dec. 2010. IEEE computer Society Digital Library. IEEE Computer Society, http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MIC.2010.156
Sunday, August 30, 2009
WWW2010: Call for Papers
The Call for Papers (CfP) for the WWW conference 2010 is available with the following important dates:
Areas and Topics of Interest
A submission to any of the tracks may belong to one or perhaps a few of the following areas (see the list of topics for a more detailed description):
Demonstration Proposals
Demonstration proposals must adhere to the conference’s submission policies. They must be submitted electronically using the conference management tool, and in camera-ready format adhering to the formatting guidelines. They will appear in the conference proceedings. Demonstration proposals must be submitted by November 2, 2009 (9:000pm PDT). Proposals should be focused on new Web technology, advances in applying Web technology, or innovative use of Web-based techniques. Proposals must be submitted in camera-ready format and are limited to 4 pages. They should describe the demonstrated system, indicate what is going to be demonstrated, and state the significance of the contribution to database technology or applications. Demonstration proposals must not be published or under consideration for publication elsewhere.
Tutorial Proposals
Tutorial proposals must clearly identify the intended audience and its assumed background. Proposals must be no more than 5 pages and must provide a sense of both the scope of the tutorial and depth within the scope. The intended length of the tutorial (full day or half day) should also be indicated, together with justification that a high-quality presentation will be achieved within the chosen time period and the indication of the main learning outcomes. Proposals should also include contact information (name, email, address, telephone number, and FAX number) and a brief bio of the presenters. If the proposed tutorial has been given previously, the proposal should include where the tutorial has been given and how it will be modified for WWW 2010.
Proposals must be submitted electronically by November 15th, 2009 (9:00pm PDT). Tutorial presentations will be published and made available to WWW participants.
Workshop Proposals
WWW 2010 will again feature a number of co-located workshops. A workshop proposal should be no more than 5 pages and should include the workshop title, technical description of the the topic and issues, justification, chairs, potential program committee members, duration and history (if any) of the workshop. If the proposal is for a recurring workshop, information about attendance, number of submissions and accepted papers must be included in the proposal. Proposals should be submitted by October 10th, 2009 (9:00pm PDT).
WWW 2010 offers the usual serviced workshops, where registration, catering, room allocation and audio/visual will be organized by the conference organizers. The serviced workshops will take place on Monday and Tuesday, before the conference. The workshops will be hosted at the conference venue. Workshop proposals may have any duration from half-a-day to 1 day. Please indicate your preference for a date. Note that proposals must be unconditional concerning scheduling. It is very likely that some workshops will not get their preferred date.
2009/10/10 | .. Workshop proposals due |
2009/10/26 | .. Abstracts for papers and demos due |
2009/11/02 | .. Papers and demos due |
2009/11/15 | .. Tutorial proposals due |
2010/01/21 | .. Author notifications out |
2010/02/11 | .. Camera ready papers due |
2010/04/26 | .. Conference begins |
Areas and Topics of Interest
A submission to any of the tracks may belong to one or perhaps a few of the following areas (see the list of topics for a more detailed description):
- Search: Web indexing, searching, query processing, scoring, ranking, query log analysis.
- Data Mining and Machine Learning: Deriving actionable insight from Web information sources: query logs, Web graph, social networks, click trails, text documents, etc.
- Bridging Structured and Unstructured Data: Information extraction and integration, and next-generation searching and querying techniques that exploits these.
- Social Networks: Models, algorithms, systems and issues around social networks and collaborative environments.
- Semantic Web: Metadata representation and standards, ontologies, reasoning and logic, agents.
- Security and Privacy: Theory and practice of data and system security, privacy, anonymization and cloaking, information contract codification, protocols.
- Internet Monetization: Markets, auctions, games, pricing, advertising, and other Web-specific economic activities.
- Software Architecture and Infrastructure: Processes, principles, methods, models, and architectures supporting the design and development of Web applications.
- Performance, Scalability and Availability: System engineering issues for traditional and emerging Web applications.
- Networking and Mobility: Communication protocols, robustness, security, mobile applications, content distribution.
- Users Interfaces and Rich Interaction: Designing, streamlining and evaluating the interaction boundaries between users and the system, studies in cognitive load and its mitigation, multiparty interaction.
- Rich Media: Web-scale management of rich media such as video, images, audio, and music; interactive media and collaboration.
Demonstration Proposals
Demonstration proposals must adhere to the conference’s submission policies. They must be submitted electronically using the conference management tool, and in camera-ready format adhering to the formatting guidelines. They will appear in the conference proceedings. Demonstration proposals must be submitted by November 2, 2009 (9:000pm PDT). Proposals should be focused on new Web technology, advances in applying Web technology, or innovative use of Web-based techniques. Proposals must be submitted in camera-ready format and are limited to 4 pages. They should describe the demonstrated system, indicate what is going to be demonstrated, and state the significance of the contribution to database technology or applications. Demonstration proposals must not be published or under consideration for publication elsewhere.
Tutorial Proposals
Tutorial proposals must clearly identify the intended audience and its assumed background. Proposals must be no more than 5 pages and must provide a sense of both the scope of the tutorial and depth within the scope. The intended length of the tutorial (full day or half day) should also be indicated, together with justification that a high-quality presentation will be achieved within the chosen time period and the indication of the main learning outcomes. Proposals should also include contact information (name, email, address, telephone number, and FAX number) and a brief bio of the presenters. If the proposed tutorial has been given previously, the proposal should include where the tutorial has been given and how it will be modified for WWW 2010.
Proposals must be submitted electronically by November 15th, 2009 (9:00pm PDT). Tutorial presentations will be published and made available to WWW participants.
Workshop Proposals
WWW 2010 will again feature a number of co-located workshops. A workshop proposal should be no more than 5 pages and should include the workshop title, technical description of the the topic and issues, justification, chairs, potential program committee members, duration and history (if any) of the workshop. If the proposal is for a recurring workshop, information about attendance, number of submissions and accepted papers must be included in the proposal. Proposals should be submitted by October 10th, 2009 (9:00pm PDT).
WWW 2010 offers the usual serviced workshops, where registration, catering, room allocation and audio/visual will be organized by the conference organizers. The serviced workshops will take place on Monday and Tuesday, before the conference. The workshops will be hosted at the conference venue. Workshop proposals may have any duration from half-a-day to 1 day. Please indicate your preference for a date. Note that proposals must be unconditional concerning scheduling. It is very likely that some workshops will not get their preferred date.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Cool URIs
--Excerpted from Cool URIs for the Semantic Web
The best resource identifiers don't just provide descriptions for people and machines, but are designed with simplicity, stability and manageability in mind, as explained by Tim Berners-Lee in Cool URIs don't change and by the W3C Team in Common HTTP Implementation Problems (sections 1 and 3):
- Simplicity.
- Short, mnemonic URIs will not break as easily when sent in emails and are in general easier to remember, e.g. when debugging your Semantic Web server.
- Stability.
- Once you set up a URI to identify a certain resource, it should remain this way as long as possible. Think about the next ten years. Maybe twenty. Keep implementation-specific bits and pieces such as .php and .asp out of your URIs, you may want to change technologies later.
- Manageability.
- Issue your URIs in a way that you can manage. One good practice is to include the current year in the URI path, so that you can change the URI-schema each year without breaking older URIs. Keeping all 303 URIs on a dedicated subdomain, e.g. http://id.example.com/alice, eases later migration of the URI-handling subsystem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)