W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > August 2009

minutes of 2009-08-12 teleconference

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:33:39 +0200
Message-ID: <4A8A6763.9050604@cwi.nl>
To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
All,

The minutes of last week telecon are available for review at
http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format
below). Thanks Silvia for the scribing.
The agenda for this week teleconference will follow shortly.
Cheers.

   Erik & RaphaŽl

-----------

    [1]W3C
       [1] http://www.w3.org/
              Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
12 Aug 2009
    See also: [2]IRC log
       [2] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-irc
Attendees
    Present
           Yves, Davy, Erik, Silvia, Michael, Raphael
    Regrets
           Jack
    Chair
           Erik
    Scribe
           Silvia

Contents

      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]1. ADMIN
          2. [5]2. UC & REQUIREMENTS
          3. [6]3. SPECIFICATION
          4. [7]AOB
      * [8]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________



    <trackbot> Date: 12 August 2009

    aacc is silvia

1. ADMIN

    * Roll call

    regrets from Guillaume and Conrad

    * PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 15 & 22 July 2009 telecon:

    [9]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/15-mediafrag-minutes.html

       [9] http://www.w3.org/2009/07/15-mediafrag-minutes.html

    [10]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-mediafrag-minutes.html

      [10] http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-mediafrag-minutes.html

    <mhausenblas> +1

    <davy> +1

    <raphael> +1

    <erik> +1

    <Yves> +1

    * ACTION-92: Erik and Raphael to coordinate the writing of papers
    (ongoing ? re-raise around 15/09/09)

2. UC & REQUIREMENTS

    * ACTION-68: Raphael to ask the Media Annotations WG to review our
    document

    there are actions on the MA WG chair - Raphael will follow up

    * To be discussed: Live Streaming UC (see Mail Silvia ?
    [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Ju
    l/0028.html)

      [11] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Jul/0028.html)

    <raphael> I will also ask this Friday at the HCG telecon

    there are actually two questions:

    * procedural question - how to extend the use cases document

    * technical discussion

    raphael: likes the extension, but we need to clarify
    ... difference between query and hash
    ... need to have a complete specification
    ... procedure: just write the specification and commit it

    <scribe> ACTION: silvia to write specification for streaming use
    case [recorded in
    [12]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-94 - Write specification for streaming use
    case [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2009-08-19].

    general agreement to the use case

    mhausenblas: did you have a mobile use case to it?
    ... there may be additional requirements around requirements on
    resources for media addressing
    ... mobile area is a good selling point for media fragment use
    ... I will keep this in mind an highlight it if we need more
    requirements around this

3. SPECIFICATION

    3.1 Syntax: (Yves)

    * ACTION-49: Yves to Draft the HTTP-Range syntax for different units

    (completing all the syntax for the two way handshake) (ongoing ?
    re-raise around 15/08/09, after IETF Meeting)

    <raphael> ACTION: michael to review the new UC written by Silvia and
    check whether it will cover a mobile usage [recorded in
    [13]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-95 - Review the new UC written by Silvia
    and check whether it will cover a mobile usage [on Michael
    Hausenblas - due 2009-08-19].

    Yves: reports on IETF meeting and extension of HTTP-Range syntax

    <raphael> Scribe: Silvia

    Yves: progress is made and once it's agreed, it should be ratified
    by IANA

    <raphael> scribenick: silvia

    Yves: have more info by the end of the month

    (re-raise around 30/08/09)

    * ACTION-93: Michael to revisit the TC and see which are affected by
    the temporal-optional-comma-decision

    mhausenblas: was discussion on temporal-optional-comma-decision
    finalised?

    <Yves>
    [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Ju
    l/0038.html

      [14] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Jul/0038.html

    Franck made a counter-proposal

    Yves: the trailing comma is not giving us anything useful
    ... I am fine with this proposal

    <raphael> we are discussion Frank's proposal: remove case 2 and 4
    which are redondant

    silvia: happy with this proposal - it removes the option to specify
    the same case in two different ways

    <raphael> +1 with this proposal

    Yves is happy to change the grammar in the specification

    <mhausenblas> +1

    <scribe> ACTION: Yves to make change to temporal-optional-comma
    specification [recorded in
    [15]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-96 - Make change to
    temporal-optional-comma specification [on Yves Lafon - due
    2009-08-19].

    <erik> +1

    we now have working group agreement on this specification

    +1

    Yves will reply to Franck

    RESOLUTION: the working group agrees to the temporal-optional-comma
    specification proposed by Franck

    3.2 UA Server HTTP Communication (Conrad/Raphael)

    * ACTION-69: Conrad to draw a representation of the general
    structure of

    a media resource, for streamable formats (ongoing ? re-raise around
    01/09/09, when having had full discussion)

    <scribe> ongoing

    raphael will follow up on this thread

    4. TEST CASES: (Michael)

    * See: [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCases

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCases

    TC0002: empty time segment - npt

    empty time segment

    e.g. #t=0,0

    416, would yield an empty resource, hence client must have erred

    <raphael> +1

    +1

    <davy> +1

    <erik> +1

    RESOLUTION: TC0002 is approved

    TC0003: empty space segment

    empty space segment

    e.g. #xywh=0,0,0,0

    416, would yield an empty resource, hence client must have erred

    <raphael> +1

    <davy> +1

    <erik> +1

    +1

    RESOLUTION: TC0003 is approved

    TC0004: empty space segment - aspect

    empty space segment - aspect

    #aspect=0:0

    416, would yield an empty resource, hence client must have erred

    <raphael> Yves; no restriction on the values except they must be
    integers

    <raphael> ... many ratio out there already, and more can be proposed
    later on

    <raphael> +1 for current proposal

    Yves: capturing all the restrictions in the syntax itself is not
    necessary

    +1

    <davy> +1

    <erik> +1

    RESOLUTION: TC0004 is approved

    --

    TC0005: empty track segment

    empty track segment

    e.g. #track="" (I think)

    416, would yield an empty resource, hence client must have erred

    Yves: should it not rather mean the whole resource?

    <raphael> I agree TC0005 is similar to TC0001

    Yves: selection is based on nothing defined, so it is similar to
    TC0001 and should be all

    mhausenblas: is there an implementation yet?

    <raphael> Michael: search for implementation in the real world of
    the track thing. Does that exist at all?

    yves: don't think so
    ... it's more a theoretical experiment right now

    mhausenblas: if there are none, we are free to specify

    <raphael> For consistency, I would prefer to have the same behavior
    than TC0001

    <raphael> postpone ?

    mhausenblas: I hesitate to propose to resolve it without more
    empirical experience

    <raphael> We can look at what DVD players do ... when a command
    parameter ask to play a dvd with an empty track name

    <raphael> ... my guess is that the default language is used ... and
    not err

    silvia: let's look at it from a programmer pov - if I composed it
    through a tick list and no tracks were ticked, I'd probably expect
    all tracks to be delivered

    <raphael> Correction, re TC0005

    <raphael> Proposal: 200, the entire representation is returned

    <mhausenblas> +1

    <raphael> +1

    <erik> +1

    +1

    <davy> +1

    --

    TC0006: empty named segment

    e.g. #id="" (I think)

    currently: 416, would yield an empty resource, hence client must
    have erred

    Yves: we should apply the same logic as with TC0005

    general agreement

    <raphael> Proposal: 200, the entire representation is returned

    <erik> +1

    <raphael> +1

    <mhausenblas> +1

    <davy> +1

    <raphael> Raphael notes that Silvia abstain and does not +1 on TC005

    <raphael> Raphael notes that Silvia abstain and does not +1 on
    TC0006 (oups)

    <Yves> we should probably revisit 07

    <Yves> as the definition of "empty" is different depending on the
    axis

    <mhausenblas> Yves, TC0007? Really?

    <raphael> Should we add more Test Cases when there is an ID (or a
    Track) ... but not defined in the video

    silvia: is considering the comparison between empty id and and id
    that doesn't exist
    ... but they are different

    yves: we should add a test case for non-existing ID
    ... but when no ID is specified, it should refer to the full
    resource

    --

    revisit TC0007

    Yves: since #t=, now refers to the full resource, we should revisit
    TC0007

    #t=,&id='ID0'

    <raphael> What about if you replace your input by:
    "#xywh=0,0,0,0&t=,"

    <raphael> ?

    scribe: should now refer to the named fragment ID0

    <raphael> For now, can we change the status of TC0007 from approved
    to un-reviewed ?

    Proposal: 200, return representation for named fragment ID0

    <raphael> ... but keep the previous agreement in the record

    silvia: can we add the new proposal then?

    <mhausenblas> +1

    <davy> +1

    <raphael> +1

    <mhausenblas> adding TC10mwith #t=0,0&id='ID0'

    Michael: add a new test case 10, which captures the former intention
    of TC0007

    <mhausenblas> and return 416 for TC10

    this new test case will read #t=0,0&id='ID0'

    <erik> +1

    <raphael> +1 for michael proposal to add TC0010 ... I have also used
    before the example with an empty space segment

    +1

    <raphael> same for non existing track name ... non existing id

    <raphael> so we need TC0011 and TC0012

    adding a new test case TC0011 for non-existing id

    e.g. #id="none"

    <raphael> RESOLUTION: TC0005 is approved

    <raphael> RESOLUTION: TC0006 is approved

    reply: 416, would yield an empty resource, hence client must have
    erred

    RESOLUTION: TC0005 is approved
    ... TC0006 is approved
    ... TC0007 to be changed as discussed
    ... TC010, TC011, TC012 to be added as discussed

    erik: we have run out of time
    ... thanks everyone

    <mhausenblas> great job, silvia!

    <mhausenblas> +1 to Yves proposal!!!!

    <mhausenblas> ;)

    <yves> bye, zakim

    <raphael> :-)

AOB

    <raphael> none

    <raphael> meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: michael to review the new UC written by Silvia and
    check whether it will cover a mobile usage [recorded in
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]
    [NEW] ACTION: silvia to write specification for streaming use case
    [recorded in
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]
    [NEW] ACTION: Yves to make change to temporal-optional-comma
    specification [recorded in
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]

    [End of minutes]

-- 
RaphaŽl Troncy
EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
2229, route des CrÍtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France.
e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242
Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 08:34:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:34 GMT