Re: [MMUSIC] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-media-content-04.txt

Gunnar,

On 23 Aug 2006, at 08:28, Gunnar Hellström wrote:
> It is allowed to have more than one content attribute.

True, but irrelevant.

> There is no difference in characteristics of the txp attribute  
> compared to the other accepted attributes.
> slides come from a slide showing application that has a specific  
> expected behaviour of showing one slide at a time.
> Speaker has its source in a camera, a keyboard and a microphone  
> that likely requires some polite method to be allowed to control.
> All have sources in devices and have a mixed meaning of device  
> indications and preparation for human behaviour when using the  
> contents.
> There is no reason to separate out txp in this collection of  
> attributes.

I disagree, for the reasons I have previously explained.

> With the new slimmed description it is of the same size and level  
> as the others.

The "size and level" of the description was never the problem.  
Instead, there is concern that its semantics don't fit with the  
content label.

> As I remember it, the last call just asked for an improved  
> description, not questioning the idea to include the attribute.

I am explicitly questioning the inclusion of the txp label in the  
media content draft. I believe it should be removed to a separate  
draft, defining a new SDP attribute. We should also consider if the  
user-floor label should be removed too.

A simple rewording of the description of the txp label, of the type  
you are proposing, without considering the semantics, will not  
resolve this issue.

Colin
_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic