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

minutes of 2010-11-24 teleconference

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 12:40:27 +0100
Message-ID: <4CECF9AB.1090207@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/2010/11/24-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format

Best regards,


       [1] http://www.w3.org/
              Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
24 Nov 2010
    See also: [3]IRC log
       [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/24-mediafrag-irc
           Yves, Raphael, Thomas, Silvia, Philip_(irc)
           davy, eric

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]1. Admin
          2. [6]Discuss HTML5 bug
          3. [7]3. Media Fragment Specification
          4. [8]4. Use Cases and Requirements
          5. [9]5. AOB
      * [10]Summary of Action Items

    <trackbot> Date: 24 November 2010

    <scribe> Scribe: Raphael

    <scribe> scribenick: raphael

1. Admin

    <tomayac> +1

    Propose to accept the minutes of last telecon:

      [11] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html


    <Yves> +1

    minutes accepted

    <silvia> +1


    <trackbot> ACTION-183 -- RaphaŽl Troncy to send reminders to all
    relevant groups -- due 2010-09-15 -- OPEN


      [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/183

    close ACTION-183

    <trackbot> ACTION-183 Send reminders to all relevant groups closed

    Raphael: I did send an email to whatwg and html5
    ... but the mail to the html5 mailing list didn't get through
    ... subscription problem

    Silvia, could you please forward my email to the HTML5 mailing list?

    <silvia> oh, did it not go through?

    <silvia> will do

    scribe: I have also contacted Chris Double, Frank Olivier and Eric
    Carlson to get more reviews
    ... and the CSS working group regarding the bug

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

    No, silvia, my mail went through the whatwg mailing list but NOT the
    html5 one

    <silvia> ok

Discuss HTML5 bug

    See: [14]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10723

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

    Question is what we should do since this bug has been closed by Ian

    <foolip> If he's wrong, we should explain why.

    <silvia> I think we need to propose an actual spec change

    <foolip> That will also do fine

    <silvia> then there is something to discuss

    Yves: for images, if the cropping is the default rendering behavior,
    it should be specified in our spec
    ... for video and audio, since there is more controls from the HTML5
    spec, if the default behavior is highlighting, then it could be
    specified in HTML5

    <Yves> (for time dimension)

    <silvia> text about controls:


    Yves: silvia, is there in html5, something that says how external
    controls are displayed for video?

    <Yves> media-controls should know how to interact with a fragment

    Silvia: there is only recommendations

    <silvia> Yes, I agree - there should be recommendations on what to
    display for a <video> or <audio> element that has a media fragment
    URI - in particular since we may recommend a UI change

    <silvia> but we need to formulate that recommendation

    I agree Silvia

    <Yves> for everything linked only to the content, the content has to
    define the behaviour, for external artefacts, like video controls,
    as they are part (even informally) of html5, somehting need to be in
    the spec

    <Yves> +1 to Silvia

    <silvia> and we need to do this differently for temporal to spatial

    Problem is also process: bug is closed. Should we escalate it? Or
    open a new one for temporal dimension since we agree on the space

    <tomayac> isnt part of ian's point that there are besides cropping
    no concrete use cases? only skimmed very rapidly, so might've

    <silvia> I'm not 100% sure about process (maybe Philip knows
    better), but I think we may be able to reopen the bug with new

    <tomayac> aryeh's

    <Yves> silvia, I think so too, we need clarification of the intent,
    and proposed text, as currently, Ian is perfectly right in closing
    this bug

    <silvia> I agree

    <silvia> we haven't provided any answers to the questions raised in
    the bug

    Yes, Thomas is discussing the non-cropping use case for spatial

    <silvia> the bug was not registered with a particular focus on
    spatial fragments - it was generic for media fragment uris

    <silvia> we need to have changes at least on how the control display
    should change and also how the scroll-to-fragid should be done


      [16] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#scroll-to-fragid

    <scribe> ACTION: silvia to draft the paragraph that the group will
    propose to HTML5 regarding how the control of media fragment URI
    should be done [recorded in

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-202 - Draft the paragraph that the group
    will propose to HTML5 regarding how the control of media fragment
    URI should be done [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2010-12-01].

3. Media Fragment Specification

    close ACTION-195

    <trackbot> ACTION-195 Add a paragraph in the section 7.1 to specify
    that video, audio, img or any href is all treated similarly (range
    request issued when facing a media fragment) closed

    Raphael: contentious issue, in the case of a media fragment URI in a
    very particular context, i.e. in the audio or video element, AND
    that media fragment URI looks like a temporal fragment
    ... then browser SHOULD?/COULD? issue a range request in a first

    <Yves> MAY

    Raphael: i.e. what we called the optimistic processing of media
    ... if the server ack the fact the resource is a video, then it uses
    the recipe "Server mapped byte ranges" (section 5.1.2)
    ... if the server realized that the resource is not a video, then it
    ignores the Range header

    <tomayac> in this case MAY sounds too defensive

    <Yves> MAY sounds defensive, but it's the case for all optimisations
    that are approaching crossing the layers ;)

    Raphael: anytime a URI looks like a #t= but only if this is the
    value of the href attibute of <video>/<audio> or the src attribute
    of the <source> element

    Silvia: well, Apple implements the <video> element so that the value
    could also be a m3u playlist, not a media element

    <silvia> m3u8

    <Yves> ok, in that case, time range won't apply and you will get the
    whole thing

    <Yves> hence the "optimistic optimization" (and the MAY)

    Raphael: I'm curious what will happen if the video element point to
    a m3u8 resource in a browser that is not Safari

    html <- example


    foolip, do you have an opinion on this discussion?


    <trackbot> ACTION-191 -- Yves Lafon to update the production rules
    of the time dimension with the npt format for making the hours
    optional -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN


      [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/191


    <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


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

4. Use Cases and Requirements

    <silvia> have you collected all the issues that could be added to
    the use cases?

    Raphael: we have Ericson people using media fragment URI for video
    chat, Thomas using the spec in SemWebVid, HTTP streaming that might
    use it too
    ... I wonder if at some point we should not update the UC note with
    these initiatives
    ... silvia, so far I'm only keeping track of the initiatives, and I
    think we should report them as well as the issues in the document
    later on

    Thomas: currently I'm using simple media fragment to point to
    temporal sequences of video
    ... + content negotiation to get either the RDF annotation of the
    sequence (e.g. closed caption) or the video bits
    ... the overall vision is that search results could include media
    fragments URI pointing to sequences that are relevant for a video
    ... use case of finding people and highlighting faces with media
    fragments URI, so something more highlighting than cropping

    Silvia: I think you should bring this to the whatwg mailing list

    Thomas: concerned about the too large traffic of this list

    <tomayac> silvia, maybe you could ping me a link to the thread, and
    i could jump in

    Silvia: I understand, then make sure to include this in our planned
    reply to the html5 group
    ... are you aware of popcorn.js that does similar things that what
    you intend to do

    Thomas: there is also a couple of BBC projects that do similar
    things, twitter streams displayed in parallel of programs
    ... also people in DERI working on this
    ... annotating conference media streams

    Raphael: so you agree with the principle of reporting all these
    experiments in our UC note at some point?

5. AOB


    <silvia> tomayac, you might want to read this thread:


    <tomayac> thanks, silvia

    <tomayac> can i ask an, erm, stupid question: if you say html5, do
    you say whatwg, or w3c?

    <foolip> tomayac, same same, whatever comes up first in your
    favorite search engine :)

    <tomayac> wikipedia ;-)

    great answer thomas

    scribe: the second one should be W3C


    <foolip> oh, in the context of <audio>, <video>, I think it's
    possible to send a range request without knowing the MIME type, but
    not really sane from a purity point of view. In any case I don't see
    it happening because the only benefit is one less round-trip, and
    only works with specialized servers

    <foolip> I don't think the benefit is tangible enough that browsers
    or servers would bother implementing it.

    <Yves> it will depend on big content provider interested or not in
    that (to reduce the load)

    <foolip> right, should any browser or provider show any kind of
    interest in it I could of course reconsider

    you represent ONE browser, and I'm talking to provider, such as
    Dailymotion, who could be interested ... so it might be worth
    considering at some point

Summary of Action Items

    [DONE] ACTION: silvia to draft the paragraph that the group will
    propose to HTML5 regarding how the control of media fragment URI
    should be [recorded in

    [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, 24 November 2010 11:43:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:45 UTC