{minutes} HTML WG media telecon 2015-09-01 - EME bug status

http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html>

Joe Steele


 <http://www.w3.org/>
HTML Media Task Force Teleconference

01 Sep 2015

Agenda <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0050.html>
See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-irc>
Attendees <>
Present
markw, joesteele, jdsmith, paulc, joesteele_
Regrets
Chair
paulc_
Scribe
joesteele_, joesteele
Contents

Topics <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#agenda>
Media Task Force F2F meeting, TPAC, Sapporo, Japan, Oct 2015 <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item01>
MSE and EME heartbeat publications <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item02>
New EME issues related to secure release <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item03>
ISSUE-41, ISSUE-52 and ISSUE-53 - Initialization Data issue cluster <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item04>
ISSUE-77 - Correct object name at the beginning of section 6.3 MediaKeyStatusMap <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item05>
ISSUE-17 Replace "fire a simple event" with "fire an event" for non-simple Events, Assigned to Jerry <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item06>
ISSUE-71 - Be explicit about aborting steps when resolving a promise early <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item07>
Event handler and message cluster <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item08>
next meeting <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#item09>
Summary of Action Items <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/01-html-media-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
<trackbot> Date: 01 September 2015
<paulc_> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0050.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0050.html>
Media Task Force F2F meeting, TPAC, Sapporo, Japan, Oct 2015

<markw> Yes, I will be there
<BobLund> I will not be there
<paulc_> paulc: Who will be at the F2F meeting?
<joesteele_> I will be there
<paulc_> jdsmith Microsoft is building a corporate plan and it will be ready soon.
<paulc_> paulc: Important item is the block hotel booking ends in early Oct.
MSE and EME heartbeat publications

<paulc_> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0038.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0038.html>
<paulc_> paulc: IT has been 5 months since we updated the /TR page. And we have never turned on the EME automatic publishing.
<paulc_> paulc: Can one of the Editors of each document please volunteer to take the lead here?
<paulc_> paulc: We also need to figure out who is going to use the supplied instructions to turn on EME automatic publishing.
<paulc_> markw: What is the tradeoff from a manual TR publication and turning on automatic publications.
<paulc_> paulc: For EME if we turn on EME automatic publication then every Editor's draft will show up on the TR page
<paulc_> markw I would also like for EME to do any controversial change via a pull request.
<paulc_> markw: I want us to agree to undo controversial items and put them in pull requests.
<paulc_> jdsmith: I would prefer to have the TR page and Editors draft more in sync and will take the action to turn on EME automatic publication.
<paulc_> paulc: I will ask Matt to do a manual MSE republication.
New EME issues related to secure release

paulc: this is issue 79 - 85
<paulc_> this covers issues 79-85
… David is not here so we can’t make decisions, just want to get a feel for what we should be doing
… looks like David has a preference for changing the high-level topic these are related to
… now calling these “tracked” sessions
<paulc_> ISSUE:79: https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/79 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/79>
… a little nervous about this usage
<paulc_> See TAG finding: https://w3ctag.github.io/unsanctioned-tracking/ <https://w3ctag.github.io/unsanctioned-tracking/>
ISSUE-79: https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/79 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/79>
<trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-79 .
paulc: TAG has added a note about unsanctioned tracking, this may be setting the wrong tone
… the TAG has made it clear they think tracking is bad
… e.g.
<paulc_> TAG statement from finding: "•Finds that unsanctioned tracking is actively harmful to the Web, because it is not under the control of users and not transparent.
jdmith: think that is now in the media key session type replacing secure release
… we may want to rename
markw: think that we could — this is hopefully unrelated to what TAG is discussing
… don’t think the TAG considerations apply here
… this is tracking what keys were used and when
… there is potential for misunderstanding
paulc: so will one of you open a new issue and make a suggestion of alternatives?
markw: yes I will do this
jdsmith: we talked about “persistent key usage” which is descriptive of what the feature does
paulc: back to the actual topic of the issues raised by David — he did what I suggested here
… are there any in this batch which Mark or Jerry are willing to assign to themselves and provide a solution? any easy ones?
… only one or two have had any response
… Mark you responded to the architectural one
rrsagent: generate minutes
markw: I don’t have the numbers, but there are a couple of easy ones
… the request for a more detailed description of how this is used, happy to provide that
… might just go on the wiki
paulc: that is issue 84
<paulc_> David's suggestion for more material is in https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/84 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/84>
paulc: so you took issue 79?
… none of the others are actually assigned
… let’s make some progress by assigning owners
… any others which we could take action on? not right now
markw: yes - couple I could make a pull request on
jdsmith: couple are clarifications - but issue 80 is a fundamental change
… to me tracking by key use is natural, David id redcommedning track by session
<paulc_> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/80 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/80>
markw: that could be quite complicated
… what you really want is a start time and end time for the keys
… would like to know more about existing (other) implementations
rrsagent: generate minutes
markw: issue 81 is an easy one - I will take responsibility
… I will make a proposal
<paulc_> ISSUE-81 https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/81 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/81> - Mark will make a pull request
ISSUE-81 https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/81 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/81> - Mark will make a pull request
paulc: let’s summarize
… issue 79 https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/79 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/79> — assigne dto Mark
… issue 80 — https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/80 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/80>
… who is taking that?
markw: I will respond to that
paulc: https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/81 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/81> — you said you will do a pull reuqest
… https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/82 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/82> - Mark, you and David have had a dialogue here
markw: this raised an issue, the real reaon for that impleemntation is the robustness rules specified by the DRM
… this is true of many other aspects of the spec (e.g. could implement in JS)
… we don’t talk about those aspects of the spec
… what should we talk about with respect to this type of requirement?
markw: higher level question
<paulc_> Note that TAG review https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/85 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/85> is blocked by ISSUE-82 and ISSUE-84
paulc: this is one David chose to block the TAG item on?
joesteele: I think this is a dangerous road to go down. We originally left these type of implicit robustness rules out of the spec for good reason. Many other aspects of the spec would fall under this shadow
<paulc_> ISSUE-83 https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/83 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/83> is apparently blocked by ISSUE-82
paulc: for now let’s skip over this one
issue 84 https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/84 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/84>
paulc: this is one where he is asking for more content
… Mark you said you were willing to generate content if we can figure out where
… since this is an easy one, let’s agree to initially put in the wiki
… makes it easier to change going forward
… this would unblock action here
… then we can deal with the question of whether we have enough material
joesteele: +1
paulc: Mark you have carte-blanch to generate the first draft of material
… make sure you update the bug with a ptr to the wiki asking for feeedback
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/85 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/85> is the obvious one
paulc: David is still asking for the TAG review
… have not seen this formally requested by David yet
… I would prefer we get the other ones out of the way first
ISSUE-41, ISSUE-52 and ISSUE-53 - Initialization Data issue cluster

issue-41?
<trackbot> Sorry, but issue-41 does not exist.
paulc: I believe the dependencies have been corrected
… there is a proposal for issue-52
joesteele: I believe there is a response for issue-41 and issue-52
<paulc_> Proposal for ISSUE-52 is at the end of the following email: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0023.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0023.html>
<paulc_> For ISSUE-41 there was a request for more text which Joe has provided.
<paulc_> Joe's email that David was responding to is https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0019.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0019.html>
joesteele: I responded in the issue so that we do not lose this information
<paulc_> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/52#issuecomment-136247232 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/52#issuecomment-136247232>
joesteele: I can respond to the email as well so that he can see my response in the issue
ISSUE-77 - Correct object name at the beginning of section 6.3 MediaKeyStatusMap

<paulc_> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/77 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/77>
jdsmith: that is an easy edit
… this is assigned to me, but not marked as To Be Implemented
joesteele: the inability to tag issues is an issue
ISSUE-17 Replace "fire a simple event" with "fire an event" for non-simple Events, Assigned to Jerry

paulc: still pending?
jdsmith: yes
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/17 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/17>
ISSUE-71 - Be explicit about aborting steps when resolving a promise early

https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/71 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/71>
paulc: Joe said in July he would do something
joesteele: I responded yesterday
<paulc_> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/71#issuecomment-136507577 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/71#issuecomment-136507577>
paulc: this is in David input queue
… anyone else is welcome to comment
Event handler and message cluster

https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/19 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/19>
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/14 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/14>
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/31 <https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/31>
paulc: Jerry think you had feedback you were working on
jdsmith: yes — still pending
<paulc_> http://www.w3.org/2015/07/07-html-media-minutes.html#item05 <http://www.w3.org/2015/07/07-html-media-minutes.html#item05> was previous action on Jerry
next meeting

<paulc_> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0039.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Aug/0039.html>
paulc: proposing EME meets on Sept 22nd due to folks being out
joesteele: reaction to David’s email on this?
paulc: I feel these meetings do have a positive impact — a forcing function for folks doing the work
… my sentiment is to keep having the meetings
… we will try to be respectfull of folks who cannot attend
… if you disagree please respond to Davids note
paulc: thanks all!
Summary of Action Items <>[End of minutes]
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> version 1.140 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
$Date: 2015/09/01 16:06:01 $