On 03/10/2013 09:08 PM, Randall Gellens wrote:
At 6:16 PM +0000 3/10/13, Keith (Keith) DRAGE wrote:
My understanding was that the idea was to label a particular media
stream, rather than (for example) a SIP body.
Different media streams could have different labels.
Keith is right. As an example, SIP might be used to setup a call with
an audio stream using English and a video stream using American Sign
Language.
SDP also allows other protocols besides SIP to be used to establish
the session.
OK, but that's not what I really was thinking about....
RFC 3282 (and its predecessors as part of the HTTP protocol)
distinguished between two distinct fields:
- "Here's what I'm willing to accept" - where prioritization is important
- "Here's what I'm going to use" - where prioritization is not only
unimportant, it's meaningless
It might be good if whatever comes out of this discussion supports
making that distinction.
You may also want to think about how language tags interact with
direction - if you're talking to an interpreter, where audio going one
way is English and what comes back is in Spanish, are you able to mark
the RTP session (if that's what you're marking, and not the media
stream) as "sending English, receiving Spanish"?
But this level of detail doesn't really belong on the IETF list - which
list should we use?
> -----Original Message-----
From: mmusic-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:mmusic-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
Behalf
Of Harald Alvestrand
Sent: 10 March 2013 15:07
To: Randall Gellens
Cc: Ari Keranen; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; Alexey Melnikov; Gunnar Hellstrom;
DRAGE,
Keith (Keith); Peter Saint-Andre;
ietf-languages-bounces(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no;
Flemming Andreasen; Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Tschofenig; Peter
Saint-Andre;
Brian Rosen; mmusic(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Update on Orlando time for human language draft
discussion
Sorry for barging in late on this thread, but quick questions:
- what's the right mailing list to post to on this one?
- have everyone read RFC 3282 (the standalone "accept-language" spec)?
Seems to me the desired semantic is more accept-language than
content-language.
On 03/10/2013 03:38 PM, Randall Gellens wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Thursday lunch (11:30-1:00) it is. I'll make a reservation at The
> Tropicale (the cafe in the Caribe Royal hotel attached to the
> convention center). Please let me know if you can make it so I can
> make sure we have a large enough table.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> It looks like Thursday lunch (11:30-1:00) works well for everyone
>> who has responded so far. Let's plan on that for now.
>>
>> At 9:35 AM -0700 3/9/13, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>
>>> It looks like Thursday lunch would
>>> work well.
>>>
>>> On 3/5/13 4:47 AM, Randall Gellens wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I created a Doodle poll to see if we can find a time in Orlando
>>>> to meet
>>>> face to face.
>>>>
>>>> Doodle poll for time at Orlando to discuss open issues and
moving
>>>> forward with Human Language Negotiation:
>>>> http://doodle.com/uwedikez6etwsf39
>>>>
>>>> Link to current version (-02) of draft:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gellens-negotiating-human-
language-02.txt
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Randall Gellens
>> Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak for myself
only
>> -------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
>> A child of five would understand this. Send somebody to
>> fetch a child of five. --Groucho Marx, "Duck Soup"
>
>
_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic