W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > September 2013

[apis] minutes - 4 September 2013

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 23:45:56 +0900
Message-ID: <522747A4.8090504@w3.org>
To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
available at:
  http://www.w3.org/2013/09/04-webtv-minutes.html

Also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Mark!

Kazuyuki

---
    [1]W3C

       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

         Web and TV Interest Group - Media APIs TF Teleconference

04 Sep 2013

    [2]Agenda

       [2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Sep/0002.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/09/04-webtv-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Kaz, Bin, Sheau, Daniel, Giri, Olivier, MarkV, Igarashi,
           Sung_Hei, Louay, Cyril

    Regrets
    Chair
           Olivier

    Scribe
           Mark_Vickers

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Roll Call
          2. [6]Review Open Action Items
             http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/7
          3. [7]Review and discuss the list of use cases (last call
             per schedule)
          4. [8]review of Use Case Twelve - Multiscreen
             Advertisement
          5. [9]Review and discuss the requirements
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      __________________________________________________________

Roll Call

    giri: introduces himself.

    olivier: Have bridge for 90 min, may not use 90.

Review Open Action Items
[11]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/7

      [11] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/7

    olivier: 2 open action items. both on giuseppe, who isn't on
    the call today.

    sheau: giuseppe says he's still working on his action items.

Review and discuss the list of use cases (last call per schedule)

    <olivier>
    [12]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs#Iterations_and
    _Timeline

      [12] 
http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs#Iterations_and_Timeline

    <olivier>
    [13]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Use_Cases

      [13] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Use_Cases

    olivier: Today is deadline for final review of use cases.
    ... First: Any additional use cases or any use cases to be
    deleted from the list?
    ... Work still going on on last two use cases.
    ... Please focus on new use case 12.

    <olivier> Mark_Vickers: multi-screen advertisement is a large
    topic, could almost be the focus on a single group

    mark_vickers: the topic of multiscreen advertisement is very
    large.

    olivier: we will work on those 12 use cases.

    sheau: question on the next step: what do we want to do with
    the mapping onto requirements?

    olivier: What I would like to do today is to speak about use
    case 12, then review the mapping table, then discuss how to do
    the gap analysis.

    <olivier> [Louay introduces himself]

    louay: introduces himself. main topic at Fraunhofer is
    multiscreen.

review of Use Case Twelve - Multiscreen Advertisement

    louay: Use case 12 is related to recent work at Fraunhofer.
    ... Idea behind use case is more or le ad insertion with second
    screen advertisement related to content on the main screen.
    ... There are many relevant technologies. In our prototype, we
    used Bonjour discovery of Android devices, TV connected to
    proxy which performed discovery, communication with WebSockets

    olivier: Is Mark suggesting we split the use case?

    <olivier> Mark_Vickers: ad insertion could be done on 1st
    screen

    mav: Not suggesting whether to split, just that it is a large
    topic.

    <gmandyam> Had two questions: (1) Is multiscreen ads part of
    the HbbTV 2.0 work?, (2) Should this UC be generalized
    multiscreen rendering?

    louay: Regarding hbbtv, in hbbtv 2.4 there is a lot of
    discussion of multiple devices.
    ... the prototype isn't related to any hbbtv spec.
    ... the communication used in the prototype is new, but the
    topic has been discussed in hbbtv.
    ... As to the technology, the technology used for connecting
    the screens could be used for any multiscreen use cases.

    sheau: This is indeed a large use case. More than half of other
    existing use cases could be folded into this one (e.g.
    discovery & synchronization). Could we have a hierarchy of use
    cases with large use case and sub-use cases?

    olivier: There's no rule on large vs. sub use cases. I'm
    hearing that this use case is large. Should we split it into
    multiple use cases?
    ... Any thought on how to split it?

    sheau: We could group the use cases into groups. One group
    would be synchronized multiscreen, the other would be ads
    starting and ending at same time without synchrony, third would
    be users interacting with ads

    bin: instead of splitting into multiple use cases, ask louay
    whether there are any additional requirements from this use
    case, since the end goal is gap analysis. This might be easier.

    alivier: Following that. Sheau, would you say everything is
    covered?

    sheau: I agree with bin that at this point we have covered the
    space pretty well. We should use use case 12 to guide our
    search for requirements.

    olivier: Sheau, please review use case 12 for any additional
    requirements.

    <olivier> Mark_Vickers: for some networks there would be a
    requirement that messaging for ad insertion can not be used for
    ad elimination

    cyril: The OATC group is addressing these issues in a spec
    delivering metadata to the client.
    ... The OATC has a spec. There will soon be a new spec defining
    a stream of metadata to the client. Avoiding ad elimination
    could be tricky.

    sheau: I'd like to expand further that this is not limited to
    ads. We should provide more signaling, to avoid ads or segments
    being messed up. We need to provide guidance as to what can be
    modified. Need to add semantics to signals.

    olivier: I suggest we move to next agenda item to review the
    grid.

Review and discuss the requirements

    <olivier>
    [14]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvACjV6qSvmxdE
    ctdjYwa2JOalZLOG10elE1LVRZNlE#gid=0

      [14] 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvACjV6qSvmxdEctdjYwa2JOalZLOG10elE1LVRZNlE#gid=0

    olivier: Want to review two contentious items, then review new
    use case 12.
    ... 1st contentious area:

    sheau: want to make sure we provide function of parental
    control. For example, when I say "content protection" I mean
    that when a child browses content, some content would be
    eliminated from display.

    olivier: Sounds like we agree we can remove the X
    ... Next item was use case 9 & content streaming, which
    actually wasn't contentious on reconsideration, so not an issue
    ... Reviewing use case 12
    ... This use case about device discovery, not service discovery

    <olivier> [15]http://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/

      [15] http://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/

    sheau: While it seems the same, it is reverse: Service
    discovery vs. device discovery.

    <olivier> ACTION: Sheau to split the first requirement to be
    "service discovery" and "device discovery" in the requirements
    document and cross-ref table [recorded in
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2013/09/04-webtv-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-140 - Split the first requirement to
    be "service discovery" and "device discovery" in the
    requirements document and cross-ref table [on Sheau Ng - due
    2013-09-11].

    <olivier>
    [17]http://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/#discovery-and-advertising

      [17] http://www.w3.org/TR/hnreq/#discovery-and-advertising

    olivier: Suggests sheau use the HN Requirements document for
    semantics

    kaz: W3C MMI architecture has defined semantic architecture
    that could be used here.

    [18]http://www.w3.org/TR/mmi-arch/

      [18] http://www.w3.org/TR/mmi-arch/

    olivier: [Continues editing list of requirements for use case
    12]
    ... questions use case 12 requirement for 1.5.1 device
    authentication.

    sheau: user identification needed

    olivier: that would be 1.5.3 subscriber authentication

    sheau: there are cases where number of devices are limited

    olivier: OK, we'll leave 1.5.1 device authentication
    ... [Continues editing list of requirements for use case 12]
    ... There is no cross on 1.8 Context-based and targeted service
    aggregation. Believe ther should be one. Hearing no objections,
    it is added.
    ... Any need for 1.11 Offline mode for services and content

    sheau: recorded content would be 1.11

    olivier: added cross for 1.11
    ... 1.12 device-to-device content transfer, is there any
    content transfer or just communication?

    louay: there is app to app communication. it could include
    content or content could be referenced in communication and
    pulled from a third party.

    sheau: one scenario is that the broadcast could include
    different versions of ad content and then the main device could
    serve that content to the mobile device

    igarashi: I'd also like to discuss use case 8 before end of the
    call.

    olivier: let's try to wrap us use case 12 quickly
    ... we'll keep cross on 1.12
    ... 1.13 payment mechanism definitely in scope
    ... 1.14 search - agree not in scenario
    ... 1.15 & 1.16 also not in scenario
    ... I believe that 1.17 channel identification chould be added.
    Any agree? [no replies] Not added.
    ... [Continues editing list of requirements for use case 12]

    olivier completes review of use case 12 requirements in table.

    olivier: Group should work offline on whether there are
    additional requirements from use case 12 to be reviewed next
    week.
    ... If there are any questions on requirements, please add to
    table using color red and adding a question mark "?"

    igarashi: offline mode is necessary for Use Case 8: download
    and go
    ... requirement 1.12 device-to-device content transfer is
    required for use case 8 also

    <olivier>
    [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013J
    ul/0050.html

      [19] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Jul/0050.html

    igarashi: Suggest adding adding further description for content
    protection requirement to include offline content protection.

    olivier: Suggest rewording the requirement offline on the list.

    <gmandyam> UC 8: Is network selection (e.g. optimum network for
    download) in scope?

    giri: Is network selection also in scope for use case 8?

    <olivier> ACTION: gmandyam to add requirement for network
    selection (relevant to UC8) [recorded in
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2013/09/04-webtv-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-141 - Add requirement for network
    selection (relevant to uc8) [on Giridhar Mandyam - due
    2013-09-11].

    olivier: next teleconference is in 2 weeks. we'll send agenda.
    thanks to all. apologies for running over time. meeting
    adjourned.

    <kaz> [ adjourned ]

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: gmandyam to add requirement for network selection
    (relevant to UC8) [recorded in
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2013/09/04-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
    [NEW] ACTION: Sheau to split the first requirement to be
    "service discovery" and "device discovery" in the requirements
    document and cross-ref table [recorded in
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2013/09/04-webtv-minutes.html#action01]

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version
     1.138 ([24]CVS log)
     $Date: 2013-09-04 14:44:33 $

      [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
      [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/


-- 
Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
Tel: +81 466 49 1170
Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2013 14:46:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:10 UTC