W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > December 2010

minutes of 2010-12-01 teleconference

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:57:20 +0100
Message-ID: <4CF62A10.6090509@eurecom.fr>
To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear all,

The minutes of today's telecon are available for review at 
http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format
below).

Best regards,

   RaphaŽl

---------------

    [1]W3C
       [1] http://www.w3.org/
              Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
01 Dec 2010
    [2]Agenda
       [2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2010Nov/0045.html
    See also: [3]IRC log
       [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-mediafrag-irc
Attendees
    Present
           erik, raphael, foolip, tomayac, silvia, Yves
    Regrets
           Davy
    Chair
           Raphael, Erik
    Scribe
           raphael
Contents
      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]1. ADMIN
          2. [6]2. MEDIA FRAGMENT SPECIFICATION:
          3. [7]HTML5 Bugg
          4. [8]4. Test Cases
          5. [9]5. AOB
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <trackbot> Date: 01 December 2010

1. ADMIN

    Goal today is mainly to approve some text changes, /cc silvia foolip

    <scribe> Scribe: raphael

    <scribe> Scribenick: raphael

    PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the last week telecon:

    [11]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/24-mediafrag-minutes.html

      [11] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/24-mediafrag-minutes.html

    <tomayac> +1

    +1

    <Yves> +1

    minutes are approved

    Call for HTML5 + WHATWG to comment on the spec

    [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Nov/thread.h
    tml

      [12] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Nov/thread.html

    [13]http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-Novembe
    r/thread.html

      [13] 
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-November/thread.html

    no discussion

    No comments either from indivudals requested

    scribe: should this block to us to go to CR?

    Yves: no for CR stage, only at PR

    <Yves> also no comment is assent ;)

2. MEDIA FRAGMENT SPECIFICATION:

    ACTION-192?

    <trackbot> ACTION-192 -- Davy Van Deursen to update the
    specification to state what the processing should do when media
    fragments request (time dimension) does not match exactly how the
    media item has been encoded -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [14]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/192

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/192

    close ACTION-192

    <trackbot> ACTION-192 Update the specification to state what the
    processing should do when media fragments request (time dimension)
    does not match exactly how the media item has been encoded closed

    "When there is a mismatch between the SMPTE time code used by the UA
    and the encoding settings of the requested media resource (e.g., use
    of smpte-25 time code when the media resource is encoded at 30fps),
    the server MUST ignore the RANGE header and returns the whole
    resource (i.e., a 200). "

    in section 6.2.5

    Raphael: no objection for this change?

    Yves: good

    <tomayac> none

    ACTION-193?

    <trackbot> ACTION-193 -- Erik Mannens to make a schema for the
    server redirect recipe -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [15]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/193

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/193

    close ACTION-193

    <trackbot> ACTION-193 Make a schema for the server redirect recipe
    closed

    See the figure in
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spe
    c/#server-triggered-redirect

      [16] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#server-triggered-redirect

    <foolip> ACTION-192 should also say what clients should do for
    #t=smpt:...

    Raphael: there is a request with a fragment URI and a 30x response
    with another fragment in the header, which is the situation
    described in the latest TAG resolution, see
    [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Nov/0107.html

      [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Nov/0107.html

    <Yves> Note that if there is a redirect to a fragment, we should
    explain the precedence rules for the UA (once the content after the
    redirect is fetched, to have the right CT)

    <Yves> (actually in 5.2.1 Location have no hash, so no issue there)

    Yves: actually, the location has no has, only the link, so it is ok

    foolip, this is fully specified in the recipe, what do you think is
    missing?

    scribe: is mapping between smpte and bytes can be done on UA side,
    then recipe 5.1.1, otherwise, recipe 5.1.2

    ACTION-194?

    <trackbot> ACTION-194 -- RaphaŽl Troncy to add an intro paragraph in
    the section 5 to explain which recipes is useful for which dimension
    -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/194

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/194

    close ACTION-194

    <trackbot> ACTION-194 Add an intro paragraph in the section 5 to
    explain which recipes is useful for which dimension closed

    Read the first paragraph at
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spe
    c/#media-fragment-processing

      [19] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#media-fragment-processing

    silvia, foolip, could you read this paragraph and states if you have
    objections

    Yves: good, but we should add that this always happen in a
    particular context
    ... i.e., within a media element for example

    <silvia> hmm, is some of this not rather appropriate for the
    "implementation" section?

    Yves: so we hint that this is a media resource

    <Yves> all "recipes" may be applied only if the contex hints that it
    should be a video

    <Yves> (or media resource in general)

    Silvia, I had an action to clarify which recipe is made for what ...
    and I use MAY as it is the most sensible option

    <silvia> what if it is just the browser url bar?

    Silvia, then we go to 7.1 and your paragraph

    <Yves> regular download, however an UA might interrupt and use a
    recipe

    <silvia> Yves, so in the url bar, the browser would start
    downloading the resource without the fragment, then realize it is a
    media resource, then do byte ranges?

    <Yves> might

    <silvia> makes sense

    ACTION-197?

    <trackbot> ACTION-197 -- RaphaŽl Troncy to also add in the intro of
    Section 5 a paragraph explaining the optimistic processing of
    fragments (using ranges in seconds) -- due 2010-11-09 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/197

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/197

    close ACTION-197

    <trackbot> ACTION-197 Also add in the intro of Section 5 a paragraph
    explaining the optimistic processing of fragments (using ranges in
    seconds) closed

    Read the second paragraph at
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spe
    c/#media-fragment-processing

      [21] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#media-fragment-processing

    Yves: 1st paragraph should state that the MIME TYPE of the resource
    is known to be media

    Raphael: 2n paragraph is when don't know yet, thus the optimization

    <silvia> exceptthe first 5.1.2 reference should be a 5.1.1 reference

    Yves: change the "it is recommended" by a MAY

    No silvia, we don't have any information about the resource ... no
    MIME type, no header

    scribe: impossible to do 5.1.1

    <foolip> My only issue is that OGG is spelled Ogg.

    thanks foolip

    so I will do these changes

    <silvia> as soon as the media element is set up, it is clear

    ACTION-198?

    <trackbot> ACTION-198 -- RaphaŽl Troncy to edit section 7.1 for
    taking into account the cropping resolution -- due 2010-11-09 --
    OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/198

      [22] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/198

    close ACTION-198

    <trackbot> ACTION-198 Edit section 7.1 for taking into account the
    cropping resolution closed

    Section 7.1: "For spatial URI fragments, the next section describes
    two distinct use cases, highlighting and cropping. HTML rendering
    clients are expected to implement cropping as the default rendering
    mechanism. "

    <tomayac> bummer, but makes sense from a "fragment" point of view

    ACTION-199?

    <trackbot> ACTION-199 -- RaphaŽl Troncy to add a clarification text
    regarding the purpose of the grammar -- due 2010-11-24 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/199

      [23] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/199

    ACTION-200?

    <trackbot> ACTION-200 -- RaphaŽl Troncy to send a proposal to close
    ISSUE-19 that consists in: clarification text + normative parsing
    algorithm -- due 2010-11-24 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/200

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/200

    <Yves> would be happy to remove any reference to "highlighting"

    both pending for now, will be done after the telecon

    ACTION-201?

    <trackbot> ACTION-201 -- Silvia Pfeiffer to write a paragraph, note
    to developers, that they can easily implement a javascript to
    forward the hash on the URI to the video element -- due 2010-11-24
    -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [25]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/201

      [25] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/201

    close ACTION-201

    <trackbot> ACTION-201 Write a paragraph, note to developers, that
    they can easily implement a javascript to forward the hash on the
    URI to the video element closed

    <scribe> New section in
    [26]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spe
    c/#media-fragment-webapps

      [26] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#media-fragment-webapps

    Could you read what Silvia has written?

    <Yves> seems to be an example of what can be done, it should be
    marked as such (as it could be seen as being normative)

    <silvia> it is written under the condition that HTML5 media elements
    will support media fragment, btw

    Raphael: the entire section is informative

    <tomayac> do we have a solution for setting 2 videos on a page to
    say the first 20secs in, and the second 30secs in?

    No tomayac

    should we?

    <tomayac> maybe

    <silvia> tomayac, I had an example for it, but I don't think it's
    necessary

    <silvia> if you have more than one video on a page, it's likely to
    be a gallery-type use case and fragments don't make much sense

    <Yves> it is not linked to media fragment, but how to send compound
    state to a js application that will put the mediafrag on the src
    elements

    <Yves> there is no direct relationship between a fragment on an html
    page and fragments on video elements within that page

    <tomayac> agreed. use case might be to set the thumbs (stills)
    appropriately

    <silvia> tomayac, that would require a temporal media fragment of no
    duration

    silvia, text is agreed, thanks!

    ACTION-202?

    <trackbot> ACTION-202 -- Silvia Pfeiffer to draft the paragraph that
    the group will propose to HTML5 regarding how the control of media
    fragment URI should be done -- due 2010-12-01 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [27]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/202

      [27] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/202

    <tomayac> yepp, basically was just wondering

HTML5 Bugg

    <silvia> let me call in for this one - it needs a discussion

    silvia, did you this one?

    <silvia>
    [28]https://wiki.mozilla.org/Accessibility/Video_Media_Fragments

      [28] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Accessibility/Video_Media_Fragments

    <scribe> ACTION: tomayac to build a media fragment URI parser in
    javascript [recorded in
    [29]http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - tomayac

    <scribe> ACTION: Thomas to build a media fragment URI parser in
    javascript [recorded in
    [30]http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-203 - Build a media fragment URI parser in
    javascript [on Thomas Steiner - due 2010-12-08].

    <silvia> please read above link for action 202

    Raphael: I like it

    foolip, could you read
    [31]https://wiki.mozilla.org/Accessibility/Video_Media_Fragments

      [31] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Accessibility/Video_Media_Fragments

    scribe: foolip, we want to use this to reopen HTML5 bug closed by
    Ian

    <silvia> at least to restart the discussion

    ACTION-202?

    <trackbot> ACTION-202 -- Silvia Pfeiffer to draft the paragraph that
    the group will propose to HTML5 regarding how the control of media
    fragment URI should be done -- due 2010-12-01 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/202

      [32] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/202

    HTML5 bug is at:
    [33]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10723

      [33] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10723

    Silvia: I will complete this text and mail the list before
    re-opening the bug
    ... action is still pending

    <silvia> I want us to discuss - have we considered everything? is
    something missing?

    <tomayac> sounds ok after 2nd read

    ACTION-173?

    <trackbot> ACTION-173 -- Yves Lafon to produce the code that will
    check the grammar of both the URI syntax and the Headers syntax --
    due 2010-06-22 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/173

      [34] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/173

    Yves: the code is up to date with respect to the hours optional in
    npt format for the time dimension

    close ACTION-173

    <trackbot> ACTION-173 Produce the code that will check the grammar
    of both the URI syntax and the Headers syntax closed

    <scribe> ACTION: yves to produce the code that will check the
    grammar of the Headers syntax [recorded in
    [35]http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-204 - Produce the code that will check the
    grammar of the Headers syntax [on Yves Lafon - due 2010-12-08].

4. Test Cases

    ACTIOn-168?

    <trackbot> ACTION-168 -- Davy Van Deursen to investigate how the
    automatic test suite could also be done for evaluating the UA
    behavior -- due 2010-06-02 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/168

      [36] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/168

    Raphael: I suggest we have dedicated telecon about test cases after
    CR transition
    ... I think once the few remaining spec edit are done, we should
    transition

    <erik> +1

    Yves: we need to close all issues too

    Raphael: goal is to have all ISSUE close by next week
    ... in order to make sure issuers are happy
    ... and transition to CR

5. AOB

    <tomayac> n/a

    <silvia> thanks!

    meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Thomas to build a media fragment URI parser in
    javascript [recorded in
    [37]http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]
    [NEW] ACTION: tomayac to build a media fragment URI parser in
    javascript [recorded in
    [38]http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]
    [NEW] ACTION: yves to produce the code that will check the grammar
    of the Headers syntax [recorded in
    [39]http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-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.eurecom.fr/~troncy/
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 11:00:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:40 GMT