W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > June 2012

: : Telco, details + draft agenda

From: Sunyang (Eric) <eric.sun@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 12:44:29 +0000
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Message-id: <9254B5E6361B1648AFC00BA447E6E8C32AEA4D46@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com>

-----ʼԭ-----
: Harald Alvestrand [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no] 
ʱ: 201267 20:29
ռ: public-media-capture@w3.org
: Re: : Telco, details + draft agenda

On 06/07/2012 10:57 AM, Sunyang (Eric) wrote:
> Hi all, 
>
> My suggestion to agenda 1705 Requirement
>
> Use Case 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5 should be kept in specification.
> Use Case of 2.3 is mainly about mediastream processing, which is in mediastream group scope
2.3 does not deal with passing mediastreams over a wire; I think the
interaction of mediastreams with other elements on a page came along to
this group together with the definition of mediastreams.
>
> Requirement should be separated to following kind
>
> Control/Permission
> Content Playback
> Multi-Devices/Parties
> Privacity
>
> What's more the use case should be modified to has a formal format
> Like: short abbreviation, motivation, derived requirement, and has a list number, for example uc 1, uc 2 etc
Like the IETF use case document?


[Yang]I haven't seen the IETF use case document, sorry, :) Do we need align with that?

>
> Yang 
> Huawei
>
>
> -----ʼԭ-----
> : Stefan Hakansson LK [mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com] 
> ʱ: 201265 17:11
> ռ: public-media-capture@w3.org
> : Telco, details + draft agenda
>
> Time: 5pm - 6.30pm CET (GMT + 2) Thursday June 7th
>
> IRC: #mediacap on irc.w3.org, port 6665
>
> Zakim conf code: 6227 ("mcap")
>
> Draft agenda (proposals are as always more than welcome!):
>
> ============================================================
> 1700     * Welcome, scribe
>           * Approve minutes
>
> 1705     * Requirements:
>      - agree on valid set of scenarios (should be rtcweb scenarios + 
> TFs scenarios)
> (
>      - Go over how we need to specify requirements
>      - Prioritize requirements, because were not going to meet them all 
> in phase 1
>
> 1735    * MediaStream integration with media elements (Jim Barnett) 
> (basis email on May 18 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2012May/att-0064/MediaStreamsAsMediaElements.html)
>
> 1740    * Discuss updated proposal of definition of the 
> MediaStreamTrackList collection interface (Rich Tibbet; if sent on list 
> before meeting)
>
> 1745     * Resource reservation: discuss proposal by Anant (should be 
> sent on list before meeting)
>
> 1755     * Verify that there are no remaining open issues on Constraints 
> (Dan Burnett).
>
> 1805     * Review  the open items at 
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Media_Capture#Open_Items; Editors to ask for help 
> if needed
>
> 1815     * Identify stuff that needs to be resolved in the WebRTC / 
> RTCWEB meetings (if any)
>
> 1825     * AoB
>
> 1830     * Close
> =====================================================
>
> Stefan for the chairs
>


Received on Thursday, 7 June 2012 12:51:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:24:35 UTC