W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > January 2011

minutes of 2011-01-19 teleconference

From: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 12:40:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4D36CDB2.2010000@eurecom.fr>
To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear all,

The minutes of today's phone telecon are available for review at 
http://www.w3.org/2011/01/19-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format
below).

We have planned the following 3 next telecon:
   - 26/01/2011: final spec review and new LC approval by the group
   - 02/02/2011: invitation of Adisson to address ISSUE-17 [I18N in 
track names]
   - 09/02/2011: review of test cases
We expect a maximum participation for these 3 telecon.

@Silvia, we discussed last week the fact that you should mail the group 
about which more HTML5 bugs you would like to open given Ian closed bug 
10723. We conclude today that what is important to add in the HTML5 spec 
is the specification when the fragment should be stopped (only the 
starting time is specified currently), see my comment 11. Do you want to 
open such a bug or do you want me to do it?
Best regards.

   RaphaŽl

-------------
    [1]W3C
       [1] http://www.w3.org/
              Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
19 Jan 2011
    [2]Agenda
       [2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Jan/0027.html
    See also: [3]IRC log
       [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/19-mediafrag-irc
Attendees
    Present
           raphael, Yves, +329331aaaa, Erik, Davy, +31.20.592.aabb, Jack
    Regrets
           Thomas, Silvia
    Chair
           Erik, Raphael
    Scribe
           yves
Contents
      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]1. Admin
          2. [6]spec
          3. [7]HTML WG liaison
          4. [8]Implementation
          5. [9]Open issues
          6. [10]test cases
          7. [11]AOB?
      * [12]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <trackbot> Date: 19 January 2011

    <raphael> Regets: Thomas, Silvia

1. Admin

    damn!

    <raphael> scribe: yves

    <raphael> scribenick: Yves

    approval of last week minutes

    <raphael> +1

    <Yves> +1

    <davy> +1

    RESOLUTION: minutes approved
    [13]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/12-mediafrag-minutes.html

      [13] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/12-mediafrag-minutes.html

spec

    Philip sent some patches that needs to be incorporated in the spec

    As we did lots of changes, we need another LC (that will be short).

    I would like that we decide on the LC next week

    aiming for 3 weeks review time

    any objection with the plan?

    <erik> no

    <hackerjack> no

    Davy: do I have to include RTSP in the spec before next week?

    Raphael: yes

    Davy: I will try

    document changed a lot in december but not a lot since then

    we need to rephrase slightly the part of the spec about SMPTE
    timecodes

    also new video codec don't have fixed framerates, we need to address
    that

    jack: 99.99% of existing movies files will have fixed framerate even
    if the format allows dynamic framerate

    raphael: we need to address this case

    Jack: starting to rethink my position on that issue, it makes sense
    to present the whole fragment in that case

    should it be implementation notes?

    Raphael: in the final document, the things that we may remove
    because of lack of implementation might go in a non-normative
    appendix

    Yves: fine as long as it is clear that it's not normative and there
    because of lack of implementation

    Davy: variable framerate is usually not implemented as the encoder
    needs to communicate with the packager, and not sure it's
    implemented now. Also SMPTE time codes at a frame-basis should be
    there

    Jack: how about implemetation ?

    Davy: might try to get one at least partial

    Jack: if people are interested in that, they should demonstrate
    their interest with code, even if it's a toy implementation

    Raphael: would like to invite Addison to discuss issue 17 about IRI
    and track names

    would feb 2 be ok? (ie: get critical mass here)

    <raphael> I18N discussion:
    [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2010Ju
    n/0056.html

      [14] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2010Jun/0056.html

    raphael: we also need to dedicate a complete telcon on test cases.

    erik: will issue 19 be solved by next week?

    raphael: yes

HTML WG liaison

    <raphael> Bug:
    [15]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10723

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

    Bug was rejected because it was multiple things in one bug, Silvia
    had an AI to open several bugs

    <raphael> I have been dropped :-(

    Yves: only the last one about having to stop at the end of the
    fragment needs reopening

Implementation

    action 204 will be dropped

    <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 204

    the header syntax should be checked in the tests

Open issues

    RTSP will be added soon

test cases

    Davy has some updates on that front

    <raphael> drop ACTION-204

    <davy>
    [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Ja
    n/0025.html

      [16] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Jan/0025.html

    <davy>
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases

    <davy>
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases

    <davy>
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases

    raphael: wondering about server-side tests

    davy: we need extra test cases, yes
    ... but we have the template for test cases

    Raphael: there are two things to check, URI parsed as it should and
    HTTP request sent as it should, and the second point is to verify
    the behaviour (graphical)

    jack: if we have a client saving the file, we can do automatic
    testing

    Yves: but there are things that we can't test that way (like
    displaying the complete timeline)

    Raphael: a few things needs to check manually, which is fine

    Jack: we need to check what SVG or CSS people are doing to test
    graphical output
    ... also if the number of manually tests is small...

    s/manually tests/manually verifiable tests/

    Jack: the first thing is to review all the current tests

    Davy: we have also an issue with sources for tests

    Raphael: can we make files or is transcoding too difficult?

    Jack: ffmpeg might help there

    Raphael: please ask on the ML.

    <hackerjack> yes

AOB?

    <raphael> One question: should we use one of the movies in the spec
    and in the test cases ?

    Raphael: should we use in the test cases one of the movies we have
    in the agenda? (ie: one with the right license)

    <raphael> * Sintel: [20]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc

      [20] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc

    <raphael> ** longer version,
    [21]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ

      [21] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ

    <raphael> * Big Bunny:
    [22]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk

      [22] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk

    <raphael> * The Elephant Dreams:
    [23]http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream

      [23] http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream

    <hackerjack> I would prefer not to use the suggested movies

    <davy>
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/media/spatial_30fps.we
    bm ?

      [24] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/media/spatial_30fps.webm

    Jack: we should create synthetic movies, easier to do checking (like
    switching backgrounds on boundaries we are about to tests)

    <davy>
    [25]http://ninsuna.elis.ugent.be/Media/MFWG/TC/spatial_30fps.mp4?tra
    ck=3;1

      [25] 
http://ninsuna.elis.ugent.be/Media/MFWG/TC/spatial_30fps.mp4?track=3;1

    erik: should we drop all the AI assigned to Michael?

    raphael: safe ot drop them

    Erik: we need to talk about use cases as well (from Shiraishi San)

    <Nobu> Thank you, I am on IRC now.

    Erik: also who is attending the workshop in Berlin?

    Raphael: no

    Erik: I should be there

    ADJOURNED

    <Nobu> I

    <raphael> Nobu: we agree to continue the discussion on your use case
    on the mailing list

    <raphael> please, create a wiki page if you want

    <Nobu> I see, thanks.

    <raphael> The Use Cases and Requirements document is sort of "on
    hold" ... which means, we will update it at the end of the rec track
    process

    <raphael> * Sintel: [26]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc

      [26] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc

    <raphael> ** longer version,
    [27]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ

      [27] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ

    <raphael> * Big Bunny:
    [28]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk

      [28] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk

    <raphael> * The Elephant Dreams:
    [29]http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream

      [29] http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream

Summary of Action Items

    [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, 19 January 2011 11:44:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:42 GMT