W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > December 2011

Re: [MEDIA_PIPELINE_TF] Content protection proposal

From: Clarke Stevens <C.Stevens@CableLabs.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 23:10:22 -0700
To: "Mark Vickers @ Comcast" <mark_vickers@cable.comcast.com>
CC: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CB102D44.16BFF%c.stevens@cablelabs.com>
I just sent it 2 seconds before I got this message. However, I'll comment
on your recommendations below.

-Clarke

On 12/15/11 10:47 PM, "Mark Vickers @ Comcast"
<Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com> wrote:

>Minor edits:
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/HTML_Error_codes
>> 
>>http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/ADR_Minimal_Control_Model_Proposal
>
>Minimal Control Model needs explanation. Perhaps copy explanation of the
>three models into this doc or link back to other doc.

I did include a link back to the architectural models (although it is
towards the end of the message).

>
>Shouldn't bytes/second should be bits/second. Was this discussed? The SVG
>API and other IETF APIs are bits/second.

Since the message includes on links to the wiki, I can check and make the
change (if necessary) on this. I agree that it should be bits per second.

>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/Netflix_Content_Protection
>
>May need to be some mention that there hasn't been time for full review
>by or consensus of MPTF yet.

We must be on the same wavelength. That's exactly what I did.

>
>Where do we reference the seamless playback use case and API?

It's not referenced in the current response since we don't really have
anything to link to yet. I still have an hour if we want to try to put
something together. Would we link it to the same two bugs as the other
proposals (parameters and feedback)? I'm not sure that was specifically
requested from any particular bugs like the other proposals were.

>
>Thanks,
>mav
>
>On Dec 15, 2011, at 9:12 PM, Clarke Stevens wrote:
>
>> I'm starting my final edits now and will send in the proposals shortly.
>> Last call for changes or comments.
>> 
>> -Clarke
>> 
>> On 12/15/11 9:19 PM, "Mays, David" <David_Mays@comcast.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I'm ok with the changes. Did you submit yet?
>>> 
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: Clarke Stevens [C.Stevens@CableLabs.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 5:08 PM
>>> To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG
>>> Subject: Re: [MEDIA_PIPELINE_TF] Content protection proposal
>>> 
>>> Although we have not really had a chance to review it as a group, I am
>>> considering providing Mark Watson's content protection proposal as
>>> feedback to the HTML WG in addition to the HTML Errors and ABR Minimal
>>> Control proposals.
>>> 
>>> My motivation is that same as that for the ABR Minimal Control
>>>proposal.
>>> It is a useful and well-considered proposal that may require some
>>> modification, but it provides a basis for discussion and a path for
>>> inclusion in HTML5.
>>> 
>>> In other words, our feedback on LC Bugs 13625 and 12399 that is due
>>>today
>>> would include HTML Errors, ABR Minimal Control and Netflix Content
>>> Protection:
>>> 
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/HTML_Error_codes
>>> 
>>>http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/ADR_Minimal_Control_Model_Proposa
>>>l
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/Netflix_Content_Protection
>>> 
>>> I plan to send this feedback to HTML WG this evening after people have
>>> had a chance to comment, edit, etc.
>>> 
>>> Let me know what you think.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Clarke
>>> 
>>> P.S. For your convenience, here are the links to the relevant bugs:
>>> 
>>> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13625
>>> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12399
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>
Received on Friday, 16 December 2011 06:10:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:06 UTC