RE: Generating June 9 working drafts

On these two:

For #110, we addressed most of the issues, but there are two outstanding items:

  *   The discussion starting at https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/110#issuecomment-224769856. Perhaps we should file a separate issue?
  *   https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/110#issuecomment-224845536, which seems more gneral. Reading.
The first seems like at most a new issue we carry forward for editorial changes, right?

The questions raised in the second comment present a privacy concern.  Do you believe it’s still open, and that it could require substantive changes to resolve?

Jerry

From: Jerry Smith (WPT) [mailto:jdsmith@microsoft.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 7:00 PM
To: David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>
Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>; Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>; Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>; public-hme-editors@w3.org
Subject: RE: Generating June 9 working drafts

Perhaps remove then #192, #207, #101 and #85; plus Issue 3?

That leaves #221, #219, #242 and #237 for cleanup during CR.

From: David Dorwin [mailto:ddorwin@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 6:50 PM
To: Jerry Smith (WPT) <jdsmith@microsoft.com<mailto:jdsmith@microsoft.com>>
Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com<mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>>; Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org<mailto:plh@w3.org>>; Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com<mailto:watsonm@netflix.com>>; public-hme-editors@w3.org<mailto:public-hme-editors@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Generating June 9 working drafts

One (ISSUE 3) does not have an issue, but I think we can remove it. Summary:

  *   #192, #207, #101: We could remove all those related to VNext issues.
  *   #221: I think PING members plan to review now that we've addressed #117, etc.
  *   ISSUE 3: I'm not sure there is anything to do here. I heard the Second Screen CG is including this topic in their re-charter.
  *   #85: Covered by the at risk statement.
  *   #219, #242 and #237 seem like something we can address in CR.

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Jerry Smith (WPT) <jdsmith@microsoft.com<mailto:jdsmith@microsoft.com>> wrote:
There are 10 issue boxes in the spec, I believe all with active issues behind them.  I assumed they’d not be removed for CR, but perhaps later.

From: Paul Cotton
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 6:38 PM
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org<mailto:plh@w3.org>>; David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com<mailto:ddorwin@google.com>>; Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com<mailto:watsonm@netflix.com>>; Jerry Smith (WPT) <jdsmith@microsoft.com<mailto:jdsmith@microsoft.com>>
Cc: public-hme-editors@w3.org<mailto:public-hme-editors@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Generating June 9 working drafts


There are two red ISSUE boxes in the EME SOTD for #192 AND #221.  Can these be removed?  Are there any others in the document?

[cid:image001.jpg@01D1C281.9088F700]

/paulc



-----Original Message-----
From: Philippe Le Hegaret [mailto:plh@w3.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 9:29 PM
To: Jerry Smith (WPT) <jdsmith@microsoft.com<mailto:jdsmith@microsoft.com>>; Matt Wolenetz <wolenetz@google.com<mailto:wolenetz@google.com>>; Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com<mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>>
Cc: David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com<mailto:ddorwin@google.com>>; Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com<mailto:watsonm@netflix.com>>; public-hme-editors@w3.org<mailto:public-hme-editors@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Generating June 9 working drafts



One change here. Our systems [1] switched to tomorrow (June 10) already (?).



If it is issued, the CfC for EME will now have to use



  http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-encrypted-media-20160610/




Philippe



[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tr-notifications/2016Jun/