Re: [Minutes]] HTML Media Extensions WG Editors meeting, Tue Jul 19

To better coordinate the fixing of
https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/74, @plehegar, when were you
going to be OOO? IIRC from the meeting yesterday that we needed to get the
bytestream registry updates completed before you went OOO, and I thought
that meant that we needed to finish those updates before EOW.

Thanks,
Matt

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> Meeting: HTML Media Extensions Editors, Tue Jul 19
>
>
>
> Minutes are recorded at
> http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-minutes.html
>
> and below:
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: W3C] <http://www.w3.org/>
> - DRAFT - HTML Media Task Force Teleconference 19 Jul 2016
>
> Agenda
> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hme-editors/2016Jul/0002.html>
>
> See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-irc>
> Attendees
>
> *Present*
>
> *paulc, markw, jdsmith, MattWolenetz, David*
>
> *Regrets*
>
> *Francois*
>
> *Chair*
>
> *SV_MEETING_CHAIR*
>
> *Scribe*
>
> *plh*
> Contents
>
>    - Topics <http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-minutes.html#agenda>
>       1. MSE and EME timeline
>       <http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-minutes.html#item01>
>       2. MSE test suite and testing report status
>       <http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-minutes.html#item02>
>       3. EME status
>       <http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-minutes.html#item03>
>    - Summary of Action Items
>    <http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
>    - Summary of Resolutions
>    <http://www.w3.org/2016/07/19-html-media-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <*markw*> I was speaking, but apparently you can't hear me, so I will
> call in again
>
> <*scribe*> scribeNick: plh
>
> <*scribe*> Meeting: HTML Media Extensions Editors
>
> <*markw*> Seems you still can't hear me, but it is very noisy here
> anyway, for first 30 min
>
> *MSE and EME timeline*
>
> *Paul:* Aug 2, we're doing a CfC for MSE and EME for proposed
> recommendations
> ... input for the drafts is editorial work and test suite and testing
> report
> ... also make decisions about features at risk
> ... we have some probability of getting MSE ready by that date
> ... not sure about features at risk yet
> ... editors will need to make recommendations to the group
> ... so some chances of having adequate testing results for MSE
> ... but for EME, we're good on editorials and features at risk, we haven't
> made progress on the test suite
> ... any question about timeline?
>
> [none heard]
>
> *Paul:* I'll target to have an editors draft on July 29 for the group
>
> *MSE test suite and testing report status*
>
> report
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016Jul/0006.html
>
> and
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hme-editors/2016Jul/0005.html
>
> [[
>
> 1. Outstanding PR on test repo should be reviewed, fixed as needed, and
> merged.
>
> 2. I think the test suite can be viewed as "good enough" after that,
> although it can certainly be improved.
>
> 3. Some features are not yet implemented across browsers. The
> implementation report should be updated once that is done. I'd be happy to
> do that once I am back to work.
>
> ]]
>
> *Matt:* I'll deal with
> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Amedia-source
>
> *Paul:* any ETA?
>
> *Matt:* this week should be fine
>
> *Paul:* can we regenerate the test results after that?
>
> *Plh:* assuming we have changes in implementations
>
> [[
>
> 1. the on{event} attributes
>
> 2. live seekable range
>
> 3. audioTracks and videoTracks in Firefox
>
> 4. resetting the delaying-the-load event in Edge (this makes most test
> files timeout but note individual tests may still pass)
>
> 5. TrackDefault (feature marked at-risk)
>
> ]]
>
> *Matt:* I've seen recent activities on on{event} attribute, live
> seekable, and abort and duration change
> ... in firefox
>
> *Paul:* Jerry, can we reach out to Mozilla on providing test results?
> ... we'll focus on those 5 and the abord duration change
>
> *Jerry:* sure
>
> *Paul:* features at risk
>
> [[
>
> The appendStream method on the sourceBuffer object and algorithm steps
> that are used only by it.
>
> The VideoPlaybackQuality object and the HTMLVideoElement Extensions that
> use it.
>
> The totalFrameDelay attribute on the VideoPlaybackQuality object.
>
> The TrackDefault object and its related objects, attributes, methods and
> algorithms
>
> ]]
>
> *Paul:* on VideoPlayBack, we have an issue
> ... appendStream, it's out, correct?
>
> *Matt:* correct
>
> *Paul:* for totalFrameDelay, is it tied to VideoPlayBackQuality
>
> *Matt:* we'd have to take it out anyway probably
>
> *Paul:* TrackDefault?
>
> *Jerry:* our intent is to implement it but can't implement on the timeline
>
> *Paul:* we have one implementation on VideoPlayBackQuality and
> TrackDefault
> ... can we remove them?
>
> <*markw*> The tests show that VideoPlaybackQuality interface object
> length fails on Edge
>
> <*markw*> But otherwise there are 2 implementations except for the
> totalFrameDelay
>
> *Jerry:* we have implementations in Edge and Firefox for
> VideoPlaybackQuality...
>
> *Matt:* we have very marginal tests for that in the test suite
> ... not sure if we have real interop
>
> *Paul:* can you summarize the status in the bug?
>
> *Matt:* sure
>
> http://w3c.github.io/test-results/media-source/all.html
>
> *Paul:* my recommendation is to make progress in the bug
> ... I'll make a decision later this week
>
> *Plh:* I could look to add a test on VPQ to see if we have some interop
>
> *Paul:* MSE editorial issues
>
> https://github.com/w3c/media-source/milestones/V1Editorial
>
> *Paul:* a few are not assigned
> ... any volunteer for 99 and 98?
>
> *Jerry:* I'll take those
>
> *Mark:* I'll take 83
>
> *Paul:* 45?
> ... we may not get to it
>
> *EME status*
>
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016Jul/0004.html
>
> *Jerry:* clearKey are up and running on all browsers. Firefox is
> debugging that
> ... plan was to convert them to multi-DRM
> ... progress is being made
> ... looking at clearKey, there is a partial coverage of the spec
> ... coverage look decent and a good base
> ... next step is to get gap list and add tests
> ... plan at
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hme-editors/2016Jul/0006.html
>
> *Paul:* any comment on the plan?
>
> *Mark:* in some cases, there are small gaps and bugs
> ... can be corrected with JS. should we "fix" some of the tests?
>
> *Paul:* we should keep the tests as-is, but give additional info to the
> Director
> ... our test results metrics should be based on actual results but could
> have additional data to indicate that some tests can be fixed using polyfill
>
> [discussion around what demonstrating implementations means]
>
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestones/V1Editorial
>
>
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3AV1NonBlocking
>
> *Jerry:* let's focus on editorial first
>
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/221
>
> [[
>
> Issue 221 - This specification contains sections for describing security
> and privacy considerations. These sections are not final and review is
> welcome.
>
> ]]
>
> <*markw*> All the EME V1Editorial issues are now assigned
> Summary of Action Items Summary of Resolutions
>
> [End of minutes]
> ------------------------------
> Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> version
> 1.144 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
> $Date: 2016/07/19 16:06:22 $
> ------------------------------
>
>
>