- From: Clarke Stevens <C.Stevens@CableLabs.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 23:54:53 -0700
- To: "Mark Vickers @ Comcast" <mark_vickers@cable.comcast.com>
- CC: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
I agree. I'll add the notes to the bugzilla entries. On 12/15/11 11:45 PM, "Mark Vickers @ Comcast" <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com> wrote: >Clarke, > >I don't want to rush something together for seamless playback that hasn't >had the benefit of MPTF review. I want the benefit of the expert review >and I don't want to undercut the consensus process. > >At most, you could follow-up on your email to the HTML WG and state that >seamless API was on our list at the TPAC F2F, but we don't have a >proposal ready. > >I do suggest we follow-on from the thread on this topic in MPTF and >develop a seamless proposal ASAP. We can then let the HTML WG decide what >to do about it. Whether or not it makes this revision of HTML, it's a >good topic for MPTF to work on. > >Thanks, >mav > >On Dec 15, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Mark Vickers wrote: > >> >> On Dec 15, 2011, at 10:10 PM, Clarke Stevens wrote: >> >>> I just sent it 2 seconds before I got this message. >> >> Your email looks good. >> >> You should also add bugzilla entries for the two referenced bugs with >>links back to the appropriate MPTF proposal pages. >> >>> 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_Propo >>>>>sal >>>> >>>> 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). >> >> Fine. >> >>> >>>> >>>> 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. >> >> Thanks! >> >>> >>>> >>>>> 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. >> >> Thanks. >> >>> >>>> >>>> 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. >> >> Seamless splicing was in R7 in our requirements presentation to the >>HTML WG: >> >>> R7. Additional Media Parameters >>> Suggested changes: >>> € Ability to signal and play media spliced seamlessly onto end of >>>current video. >> >> We did discuss it in the TPAC F2F with the HTML WG. When we were >>looking at the general option 3 case for ABR control, seamless playback >>was covered as a simple case. Now that we fell back to the option 1 >>simple control model for ABR, we left out seamless playback, even though >>it doesn't depend on ABR at all. >> >>> >>>> >>>> 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_Prop >>>>>>osa >>>>>> 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 06:55:26 UTC