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

minutes of 2009-08-26 teleconference

From: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:30:03 +0200
Message-ID: <4A9554FB.3080902@cwi.nl>
To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
All,

The minutes are available for review at 
http://www.w3.org/2009/08/26-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format 
below).
Cheers.

   Erik & Raphaël

-----------
    [1]W3C
       [1] http://www.w3.org/
              Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
26 Aug 2009
    [2]Agenda
       [2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Aug/0070.html
    See also: [3]IRC log
       [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/26-mediafrag-irc
Attendees
    Present
           Yves, Michael, Silvia, Davy, Raphael_(partial), Jack
    Regrets
           Conrad, Thierry, Erik
    Chair
           Yves, Raphael
    Scribe
           Davy
Contents
      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]1. ADMIN
          2. [6]2. UC & REQUIREMENTS
          3. [7]TEST CASES
          4. [8]ISSUES
      * [9]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <trackbot> Date: 26 August 2009

    <raphael> Regret+ Erik

    <raphael> Regret+: Erik

    <nessy> zakim: mute me

    <raphael> Scribe: Davy

    <raphael> scribenick: davy

1. ADMIN

    accept minutes
    [10]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html

      [10] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html

    [11]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/19-mediafrag-minutes.html?

      [11] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/19-mediafrag-minutes.html?

    <mhausenblas> +1

    <raphael> +1

    +1

    <Yves> +1

    <silvia> +1

    minutes accepted

    raphael: next WG gathering

    physical F2F will not take place

    scribe: I suggest a virtual meeting

    <mhausenblas> Michael: I know of [15]http://tinychat.com/ and
    [16]http://www.webex.com/

      [15] http://tinychat.com/
      [16] http://www.webex.com/

    <scribe> ACTION: Raphaël to setup a doodle poll regarding
    availability for virtual F2F telecon [recorded in
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/26-mediafrag-minutes.html#action04]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Setup a doodle poll regarding
    availability for virtual F2F telecon [on Raphaël Troncy - due
    2009-09-02].

2. UC & REQUIREMENTS

    action-95?

    <trackbot> ACTION-95 -- Michael Hausenblas to review the new UC
    written by Silvia and check whether it will cover a mobile usage --
    due 2009-08-19 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/95

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/95

    mhausenblas: what do others think about mobile UC?
    ... we need browser builders, mobile world will be interested in
    fragments
    ... will go through the use cases with my mobile glasses

    raphael: regarding aspect ratio
    ... if we want to keep this feature, we should have a motivation for
    it

    silvia: I don't think it has anything to do with a fragment
    ... should be removed

    Yves: UC is not really targetted at browsers, example of setop box,
    where you don't have access to tools for fitting the video into the
    screen
    ... will be more useful for the '?', not for fragments ('#')

    Yves: more generally, everything that requires transcoding might be
    available only under the ? scheme but not # (ie: sub-resources and
    not fragment)

    <scribe> ACTION: Yves to write a UC describing the use of aspect
    ratio feature [recorded in
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/26-mediafrag-minutes.html#action05]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-101 - Write a UC describing the use of
    aspect ratio feature [on Yves Lafon - due 2009-09-02].

TEST CASES

    <mhausenblas>
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCases

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

    mhausenblas: updated various TCs
    ... and added 3 new TCs

    <mhausenblas> TC0008

    Yves: we should talk with people from Google

    silvia: if there was a standard, they would have used it
    ... they will probably adopt our spec

    Yves: should we add the minutes/seconds spec to our spec, even if
    this will overlap?

    silvia: we could add the youtube timespec and use it as default

    Yves: we should discuss this on the mailinglist
    ... regarding Jack's objection
    ([21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009A
    ug/0013.html)
    ... time and space is always present in a video, while track or id
    will not always be available
    ... reason for having two kinds of behaviour

      [21] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Aug/0013.html)

    jackjansen: don't see the advantage in returning the whole resource
    in case of a non-existing track or id

    <silvia>
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCases

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

    jackjansen: wiki version seems now right, different from the minutes

    <silvia> [23]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html

      [23] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html

    <mhausenblas>
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#item03

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/12-mediafrag-minutes.html#item03

    silvia: TC0005 should return a 200
    ... same for TC0006
    ... I agree with Yves, maybe we should change 'empty track/named
    segment' to 'undefined track/named segment'

    mhausenblas: we should write a small introduction with information
    regarding our terminology
    ... 3 cases
    ... empty, undefined, or non-existent

    jackjansen: non-existent can only be verified by looking at the
    media

    <silvia> (run-time analysis)

    jackjansen: empty and undefined can be verified by looking at the
    URI

    <Yves> TC for #xywh=1920,1200,1,1 for a 640x480 picture ?

    jackjansen: there is no way to give an undefined space segment

    Yves: because space and time are always present in a video

    <Yves> TC for #t=20,30 for a 10s video

    jackjansen: what about partially existing?
    ... we should have a TC for that

    mhausenblas: two additional cases: existing and partially existing

    <Yves> use the numbers as a bitmask

    mhausenblas: tool support for TC organization?

    <mhausenblas> like
    [25]http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/rdfa-test-harness/

      [25] http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/rdfa-test-harness/

ISSUES

    ISSUE-9?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- Should we have the media type inside the Test
    Cases? -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [26]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/9

      [26] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/9

    mhausenblas: if we want to run a real test harness, we have to know
    the media type of the media used

    silvia: wait until we have some reference implementations, then we
    will see format-specific issues

    adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Rapha�l to setup a doodle poll regarding availability
    for virtual F2F teleconf [recorded in
    [30]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/26-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: Yves to write a UC describing the use of aspect ratio
    feature [recorded in
    [31]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/26-mediafrag-minutes.html#action05]

    [End of minutes]

-- 
Raphaël Troncy
EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
2229, route des Crêtes, 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 Wednesday, 26 August 2009 15:30:49 GMT

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