Re: PR draft status

[Adding the correct Mark.]

Philippe, when/how do we incorporate the final minor improvements[1] into
the -pr version of the spec?

[1] The three commits on November 9th in
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/commits/gh-pages

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> I want to repeat my thanks to ALL the editors AND Philippe for ALL their
> work on EME.
>
>
>
> > I think we can move forward with the generation of the PR.
>
>
>
> That is good since I have sent the transition request.
>
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2016OctDec/0081.html (Member
> only link)
>
>
>
> /paulc
>
>
>
> *From:* David Dorwin [mailto:ddorwin@google.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 9, 2016 4:48 PM
> *To:* public-hme-editors@w3.org
> *Subject:* PR draft status
>
>
>
> From Paul's email
>
> The EME Editors and Team should update the EME specification with any
> editorial changes that were found during the CfC [1] and inform the HME WG
> when the completed document is ready.
>
>
>
> I landed a few PRs today to fix issues I ran across, but I have no further
> changes planned. Unless Mark or Jerry have plans, I think we can move
> forward with the generation of the PR.
>
>
>
> Sometime soon, I'd like to address https://github.com/
> w3c/encrypted-media/issues/355, but we don't need to block generation of
> the PR on this. It should be transparent except that those that have local
> clones of the repository will need to work in and/or merge to/from a
> different branch.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Silence will be taken to mean there is no objection, but positive
> responses are encouraged. If there are no objections by Tuesday November 8,
> this resolution will carry.
>
>
>
> Since there were no objections to the content of this CfC from WG members
> and several indications of support, the resolution passes and we will
> request the Director to approve transition of Encrypted Media Extensions
> (EME) to Proposed  Recommendation.
>
>
>
> Note that the Formal Objections to EME will be presented to the Director
> as part of the transition request:
>
> https://dev.w3.org/html5/status/formal-objection-status.html
>
>
>
> The EME Editors and Team should update the EME specification with any
> editorial changes that were found during the CfC [1] and inform the HME WG
> when the completed document is ready.
>
>
>
> /paulc
>
> HME WG Chair
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/358
>
>
>
> *From:* Paul Cotton [mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:41 PM
> *To:* public-html-media@w3.org
> *Cc:* Philippe Le Hegaret (plh@w3.org) <plh@w3.org>
> *Subject:* CfC: Request transition of Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) to
> Proposed Recommendation
>
>
>
> In accordance with the W3C process's requirement to record the group's
> decision to request advancement [1], this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to
> request transition to Proposed Recommendation for the following Encrypted
> Media Extensions (EME) document:
>
>
>
> https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/
>
>
>
> with the following additional changes:
>
> 1.      Removal of the following material about “at risk” features from
> the Status of this Document,
>
> “The following features are *at risk* and may be removed:
>
> ·        The "persistent-usage-record"
> <https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/#idl-def-MediaKeySessionType.persistent-usage-record> session
> type and the related MediaKeySession destroyed
> <https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/#media-key-session-destroyed>
> algorithm.
>
> ·        Setting the media element's readyState
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/embedded-content-0.html#dom-media-readystate>
> value based on key availability in the Wait for Key
> <https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/#wait-for-key> and Attempt to
> Resume Playback If Necessary
> <https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/#resume-playback> algorithms.”
>
> ·        Support for insecure contexts, including the Are insecure
> contexts allowed?
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-encrypted-media-20160705/#are-insecure-contexts-allowed---deprecated>
> algorithm and steps that call it.
>
> 2.      Removal of the “persistent-usage-record” “at risk” feature as per
> ISSUE-353 [2].
>
> Notes:
>
> a)      The “at risk” feature on readyState will NOT be removed.  See
> ISSUE-336 [3].
>
> b)     The “at risk” feature on insecure contexts was removed in July as
> per ISSUE-220 [4].
>
>
>
> For your reference, there is list of recent commits to the EME
> specification:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/commits/gh-
> pages/encrypted-media-respec.html
>
>
>
> The following is a breakdown of the issues processed since the EME issues
> were triaged in March 2016 [5] for the Candidate Recommendation
> specification [6]:
>
> 53 V1 issues: https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/1?closed=1
>
> 59 V1Editorial issues: https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/4?
> closed=1
>
> 33 V1NonBlocking issues: https://github.com/w3c/
> encrypted-media/milestone/3?closed=1
>
>
>
> A list of all issues against EME is available at:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues?utf8=%
> E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue%20
>
> and a list of issues NOT dealt with in this cycle and assigned to the
> VNext milestone is available at:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/2
>
>
>
> Test results for this specification can be found at [7-9].  An updated
> analysis of the test results is available at [10].  Note that we plan to
> continue updating the EME test results until we present the draft Proposed
> Recommendation to the W3C Director.
>
>
>
> Formal Objections against EME are recorded at:
>
> https://dev.w3.org/html5/status/formal-objection-status.html
>
> These formal objections will be reviewed when we present the Proposed
> Recommendation to the W3C Director.
>
>
>
> Silence will be taken to mean there is no objection, but positive
> responses are encouraged. If there are no objections by Tuesday November 8,
> this resolution will carry.
>
>
>
> Considerations to note:
>
>
>
> - A request to advance indicates that the Working Group believes the
> specification is stable and appropriate for advancement to Recommendation
> status.
>
>
>
> /paulc
>
> HME WG Chair
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#transition-reqs
>
> [2] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/353
>
> [3] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/336
>
> [4] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/220
>
> [5]  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-
> media/2016Mar/0003.html
>
> [6]  http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-encrypted-media-20160705/
>
> [7] http://w3c.github.io/test-results/encrypted-media/all.html
> <http://w3c.github.io/test-results/encrypted-media/all.html>
>
> [8] https://w3c.github.io/test-results/encrypted-media/less-than-2.html
>
> [9] https://w3c.github.io/test-results/encrypted-nedia/complete-fails.html
>
> [10] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/
> 2016Oct/0064.html
>
>
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
>
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
>
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
>
>
>
>
>