OT: The State Of SMIL

[Sivakatirswami]

The risk of breaking rules here, (I have not yet jumped into the  
forums and may not for a month or two..) and because the integration  
with Rev is so tight, it still fits here...this OT is about SMIL

We are interested in internet delivery of media through a Rev UI, and  
Andre discovered that in some cases where a straight call from a  
player that is set to a URL... i.e. filename of player "movie" is

http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2006/4-7/media/akshardam.mov

doesn't  work too well. I  tried various settings in the QT Pro  
codec,  (We are using MPEG 4 + AAC audio... because H.264 is not  
widely adopted yet on windoz) too  fast start, reducing frame rates  
and changing the bit rate etc... but still Rev has trouble... at  
least 2.7 does ( I don't recall having the same issues in earlier  
versions of Rev so maybe 2.7 introduced gremlins into the QT  
API... ), even though the same files stream just fine in *some*  
browsers...

At any rate, Andre built a small SMIL file and then we set the QT  
player to something like

http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2006/4-7/media/ 
publishers_desk.smil

and viola! it worked like charm both on Windows and  Mac... the  
sweetness of this is that we leap frog over the broken browser/QT  
plugin issues: i.e.  where we get various complaints from X number of  
users with various different browser configurations on different  
platforms ( "I can't see the movie") ... feeding a SMIL file to a   
Rev player object over the net ... *everyone* can see the movie..A  
Rev QT player is very happy with SMIL

  I like to get the "big strategic picture" before adopting any new  
(new in our realm) technology...before giving myself marching orders  
" You *must* to learn CSS - (thank you Dan)-.. you *must* learn SQL -- 
(PostGreSQL in my case)" . Hence, before embarking on a SMIL quest,  
(study the spec, invest time in R & D, build various kinds of tests  
etc. etc.), the following questions:

1) Is SMIL still a living, forward advancing technology?

or

2) is SMIL a W3C spec that was dreamed up in the land of great ideas,  
but, like so many model planes, never flew very far, or  took only  
three flights and was superceded, and is destined to be a passing  
relic in the archive of novel media delivery experiments?

(I see Go Live has a SMIL builder... focused on small devices, so   
that could say something about # 1 above.., but we don't know the  
future of Go Live either....rumors are that it may have end of life  
written all over it...)

3) IF SMIL *is*  a living, forward advancing technology, in what  
contexts and by whom, is it being used now, in a "big" way?

4) Assuming that 3) is correct... does anyone know the SMIL syntax to  
stream successive stills?  I tried a simple slideshow SMIL file, but  
QT wants to download all the jpgs listed in the SMIL file before  
commencing playback.

5) If SMIL is already a relic, what has displaced it? and why?

Of course, since we are using Rev... we can just use Rev stream a  
sound file in a player and do http downloads of one jpg after another  
and display successively, I could probably build that in 30 minutes,  
but having that all happening inside a single SMIL.xml  file is very  
tidy and portable. also the SMIL syntax for targeting rects in the  
display space is very powerful.

All comments of any kind, shape, size, color, tangential or not...  
especially "warnings and caution signs"  are welcome

Sivakatirswami

ps... Side note: while FLASH is ubiquitous and some consultants will  
tell you if you are really interested market in penetration you  
*must* use FLASH... we are just not ready to go there... for lots of  
reasons,  not the least of  which is that buying into the Macromedia 
(now Adobe) model has major consequences for your non--profit's  
financial future. Flash and the technologies behind it come with a  
serious price tag, and it doesn't go away... you can spend $1,000's  
just to get your feet wet and to keep them wet -- if anyone can tell  
me definitively that I am wrong and FLASH delivery has  "non-profit"   
option, let  me know.  Other wise I can't help feeling that buying  
into FLASH is like  going on an IV where the $ drip is going the  
other way... and your face gets pale...when all  you are trying to do  
is deliver a little video... compared to that, Rev pricing is a  
blessing. But that is yet another OT thread...