W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > September 2016

HME WG meeting minutes, Tue Sep 13

From: Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:25:41 -0400
To: "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9e502d43-f38b-31bc-008d-6e393ba34967@w3.org>
Available at
  https://www.w3.org/2016/09/13-html-media-minutes.html

Text version:

                   HTML Media Task Force Teleconference

13 Sep 2016

    [2]Agenda

       [2] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016Sep/0059.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/09/13-html-media-irc

Attendees

    Present
           paulc, Kaz, ddorwin, markw, MattWolenetzx, jdsmith, plh

    Regrets
           Philippe, Mark_Vickers, Francois

    Chair
           paulc

    Scribe
           paulc

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]HME WG F2F meeting, Lisbon, Mon-Tue Sep 19-20
          2. [6]MSE Editorial issues, MSE Editors
          3. [7]MSE Registry publication as WG notes, Philippe
          4. [8]CfC for MSE Proposed Recommendation closes Fri Sep
             16
          5. [9]MSE test suite and results
          6. [10]EME Editorial issues, EME Editors
          7. [11]EME NonBlocking issues, EME Editors
          8. [12]Other EME issues
          9. [13]EME at risk features
      * [14]Summary of Action Items
      * [15]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

HME WG F2F meeting, Lisbon, Mon-Tue Sep 19-20

    [16]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016
    Sep/0043.html

      [16] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016Sep/0043.html

    Suggestion is to hold a joint Web & TV IG and HME WG meeting to
    discuss future use cases on Monday morning.

    So attendees should find the Web & TV IG meeting space for that
    joint meeting

    paulc: does the Web & TV IG have used cases?

    Kaz: The Web & TV IG's task force may have use cases
    ... I want to talk to Mark Vickers about older use cases from
    Sapporo TPAC

    paulc: I believe the WAVE community plans to submit new use
    cases ASAP
    ... This will be "unconference like" session with the agenda
    determined at the start of the joint meeting

    paulc will coordinate with Web & TV IG chairs on this session

    Matt: Please ensure there are good notes for non-attendees

    Paulc: Will do

MSE Editorial issues, MSE Editors

    [17]https://github.com/w3c/media-source/milestones/V1Editorial

      [17] https://github.com/w3c/media-source/milestones/V1Editorial

    [18]https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/159 will be
    triaged at V1Editorial and will be done as before we transition
    to PR

      [18] https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/159

    Jerry will prepare a pull request and Matt will review so we
    have this change ready.

    [19]https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/157 is also
    untriaged

      [19] https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/157

    ISSUE-157 is marked as V1NonBlocking

    <scribe> Chair: How do we handle this?

    Matt: If the registry can be updated separate from MSE then I
    can do a pull request for this.

    <scribe> Chair: Matt should coordinate with Philippe since the
    MSE Registry work is still pending

    Jerry: I have information now and will respond today

    Matt: I will assign 157 to Jerry and will close with no action
    my PR 158

MSE Registry publication as WG notes, Philippe

    This is still pending and plh told me he would guarantee that
    it does not hold up MSE's transition

    See [20]https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/74

      [20] https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/74

CfC for MSE Proposed Recommendation closes Fri Sep 16

    There has been support but no dissent yet.

    [21]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016
    Sep/0053.html

      [21] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016Sep/0053.html

    Due to the AC meeting next week and the publication moratorium
    I am expecting the PR transition to occur either in Lisbon or
    after the TPAC week. Publication of the PR to the AC would
    likely occur in late Sep or early Oct.

    FTR the usual PR review period for the AC is 6 weeks

MSE test suite and results

    plh tells me the WebIDL new results are integrated as are
    recent Firefox results

    <scribe> Chair: Any outstanding test results?

    Matt: Do we need more text track testing?

    <scribe> Chair: Can you send an email about text track testing
    to indicate what tests exist and which part of the spec is not
    tested.

    Matt: I will start a new thread on the public-html-media email
    list

    see Text tracks:
    [22]https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/issues/3673

      [22] https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/issues/3673

    MAtt: There are some WebIDL differences but these are outside
    of MSE and are more general problems

    David: There are diffences on how Blink handles some semantic
    tests that actually test the webidl generator

    MAtt: The implementation report is slightly out of date. Matt
    will identify the work that still needs to be added.

EME Editorial issues, EME Editors

    ISsue-317 and 320 were outstanding as of yesterday

    David: there is PR for 320 that needs to be reviewed
    ... issue-317 needs to be cleaned up
    ... issue-183 - we need to discuss his with Philippe

    <scribe> Chair: plh told me yesterday that 183 is certainlly
    not going to blocked EME

    <scribe> Chair: We need to simply decide if any changes to the
    registry SOTD are required.

EME NonBlocking issues, EME Editors

    Issue-242 has a PR that needs to be reviewed

    David: I opend Issue-312 in response to one of the objection
    threads but no one has responded.
    ... We are done the Editorial and Nonblocking items once the
    PRs are handled.

Other EME issues

    ISSUE-85: [23]https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/85

      [23] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/85

    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-85 .

    <scribe> Chair: The last time we touched on ISSUE-85 we said we
    were waiting for interop testing

EME at risk features

    David: persistent usage record - pending testing results
    ... is the current status that Edge is the only browser that
    can pass?

    Mark: This is the same for many tests so we have a general
    discussion item here
    ... ... mentioned use of various polyfills for some of these
    tests
    ... keystatus is not working the same on more than one browser
    ... We need to agree on how to handle features that only pass
    on only one browser

    David: If we have features that don't pass testing then we
    either have to wait for changing implementations or take the
    features out and repeat CR

    <scribe> Chair: Didn't we agree to have this discussion AFTER
    we completed the conversion of the Google tests?

    Mark: Yes
    ... There are quite a few of things that are not passing and
    this could either be bad tests, bugs in implementations, etc.
    ... There will likely be some features that don't have two
    implementations

    David: Have we reorganized the test suite so that the tests
    don't distinguish on key system?

    Mark: I will check into whether the most recent results are
    merged

    David: Chrome55 has better WebIDL results
    ... if you want to get those results

    Jerry: Which version of Chrome should be test with?

    David: Canary

    rrsagent

    <scribe> Chair: We need to follow up on the previous actions
    and update the test results

    Jerry: We need to evaluate the results eventually

    Mark: We need to merge the persistent license tests results in
    merger
    ... This depends DRMToday bug fix

    Jerry: We are still waiting for the test cases to be converted

    Jerry's status report:
    [24]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hme-editors/201
    6Sep/0014.html

      [24] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hme-editors/2016Sep/0014.html

    The above link indicates what tests are being done by Netflix
    and we are stll waiting for a volunteer for the 14 outstanding
    tests

    Mark: I will report tomorrow on the current work being done by
    Netflix

    Mark and Paul: Maybe we will have an EME test hacking session
    at TPAC

    David: I understand Jerry's desire to minimize his work

    Jerry: I will do an update with Mark's change to not
    distinguish on key system

    <scribe> Chair: Paul provided an oral summary for late arriving
    plh

    plh: We need to review the Netflix tests
    ... I know how long we need to finish MSE but it is NOT clear
    how to handle our charter for EME
    ... We need to know our timeline for EME before the end of TPAC
    ... We run a risk of not getting EME done if we don't have a
    clearer plan for EME testing
    ... We need someone to step up for reviewing the Netflix
    migration tests

    Jerry: MSFT will review Netflix converted tests but we don't
    have the resources to do the conversion themselves

    plh: we need to have the timeline at TPAC
    ... And if mark is right that we don't have all features
    implemented then the problem is bigger - the timetable is very
    fuzzy
    ... It is NOT clear how the Director would react to a request
    for 6 month extension to charter to get better test results
    ... I am not picking on today's attendees that are doing the
    work. We need other to step up to do the testing work.

    Matt: Will the uncertainty for EME impact MSE?

    plh: No. It appears that we can get a MSE recommendation by the
    end of October.
    ... We need to also discuss how to do any future work on MSE.
    ... We need to figure out how the uncertainty of EME does not
    impact MSE.
    ... The policitical pressure on EME is increasing. Remember
    that I warned that we needed to get done by the end of Sept.

    Mark: Do you ahve comment on where EME V2 would be done?

    plh: That topic needs to wait until we have a clearer story on
    EME V1

    Mark: Maybe the story for V2 will influence people's views on
    how to handle lack of interop on EME V1

    <scribe> Chair: IS there anyone on the call that can help with
    converting the outstanding 14 Google tests?

    Mark: Netflix will help but we need time to get thru them all

    <scribe> Chair: What is the latest date you can use to collect
    data for a charter extension?

    plh: Sep 27
    ... If the Director does not give a charter extension he might
    tell the WG to publish EME as a WG Note

    paulc: If EME was published as a WG Note could it be published
    with a license that would permit others to use the content?

    plh: That could be considered.
    ... Patent commitments only apply to Recommendations and
    therefore any patent obligations on EME would be released

    David: We may need to engage Firefox on the Key Status tests,
    especially for Clear Key since Edge does not support Key Status
    ... The Keystatus tests were working on Chrome

    <scribe> Chair: We need to have a clear list of work tiems for
    EME testing

    plh: It is possible to add people to the owner file for just
    EME. Just let plh know. You will get pinged by GitHub when
    there is a new PR.
    ... You may need to manually tell Github that you want futher
    updates on the PR

    David: You will be added as a reviewer to new PRs if you are in
    the owners file.

    Jerry: I will publish the updated results today

    David: Then I will start a thread with the Editors the gap list
    for implementations based on a shorter less than two list.

    Mark: I will give the conversion of tests updates as well

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 13 September 2016 20:25:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 September 2016 20:25:47 UTC