Re: Update of RFC 2838, tv: URI

> [Re. venue for follow-up discussions, I suggest that the URI mailing 
> list (uri <at> w3.org), in particular for syntax aspects.]
> 
> At 21:23 06/08/20, Keith Moore wrote:
>> My impression was similar - if you're just going to have the tv:
>> URI point to a web page, why not just use the http (or whatever)
>> URI that points to the web page?
> 
> In my understanding, the intent is not to use HTTP for retrieval, but
> just to use DNS and Web pages as a lightweight way of assigning IDs
> to TV channels. The web page is only used for minting, and the URI
> points to the actual TV program/channel/feed or whatever you call it.
> 
yes, that's my understanding also.  but it's poor design to expect
existing web pages intended for humans to also contain machine-readable
information about TV feeds.  and it's poor architecture to effectively
expect future URI types to depend on HTTP.

>> IMHO there should be a way to use a tv: URI to do things that you'd
>> want to do with a tv broadcast - watch it (via the net, maybe via
>> broadcast radio, maybe via satellite), record it, find out its
>> schedule (say in XML so you could search through it for particular
>> programs), send them comments on particular programs, respond to
>> opinion polls, etc.
> 
> Again just in my understanding, watching it would indeed be the 
> primary purpose. So if you clicked on a URI like tv:bbc.co.uk/bbcone,
>  on a sufficiently equiped and configured device, you would view that
> channel. On the other hand, if you clicked http://bbc.co.uk/bbcone, 
> you would just be looking at a Web page, not a television program.