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

Re: minutes of 2011-01-19 teleconference

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:38:31 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTinn5uYo30VQYdFi0-YrYPQjsoGi0RA20vjSMKT+@mail.gmail.com>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Hi Raphael, all,

I'm still trying to recover from a really bad jetlag, but I will take
care of this. I think it's due really soon for us to elevate this to
an issue. Will find out.

Cheers,
Silvia.

2011/1/19 RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>:
> 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 Friday, 21 January 2011 12:39:25 GMT

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