W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hme-editors@w3.org > May 2017

Re: EME: issues in recent commits

From: David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 17:56:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHD2rsgfcixF57CX6+BSLbvoc-RO_uesj02hco5wfrra+nMMNQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>
Cc: public-hme-editors@w3.org
Three of your PRs have outstanding actions/questions but are otherwise fine.

Is ReSpec still broken? The spec at https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/
is growing further out of date.

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org> wrote:

> On 4/13/2017 3:35 PM, David Dorwin wrote:
>> Hi Philippe,
>> I just fixed a typo in -respect.html and pushed that to master. I didn't
>> update index.html because ReSpec is unhappy. Did you manually generate
>> index.html? Is there any word on a fix for the problem?
>> While doing that, I found some issues in recent commits.
>> 1.
>> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/commit/1f112baec28a70
>> b4c472902c57d9856fb552288b#diff-f72607e47a6f74e53dc90eab8ee094e2
>> made the NOTE apply to only one branch of the step. If the previous
>> markup was incorrect, the note should have been moved outside the `</dl>`.
> Proposed fix in
>  https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/pull/395
> 2. The last two commits changes macros, especially those related to
>> queueing a task. There are a couple issues.
>>   * The `queue-a-task` macro name was replaced with `queueing`. I think
>>     this should have been left alone as it more clearly represents what
>>     the macro will be converted to. It doesn't have to match the target
>>     anchor name.
>>   * Upper case 'Q' was replaced with 'q' in the macro names. The upper
>>     case letter is intentional because it indicates that he text will be
>>     capitalized. For one macro, we had both upper and lower case 'Q'.
>>     Now both are lower case, which breaks some of the resulting text.
>>     For example, step 10.10
>>     of https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/#dom-mediakeysession-g
>> eneraterequest.
> Proposed fix in
>  https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/pull/396
> FYI, we still have some open "V1" issues. What is the plan for those?
>> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/3
>> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/4
> One of the editors need to propose texts for the V1 Editorial issues at
> the minimum or move them to VNext:
>  https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/368
>  https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/369
>  https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/370
> The editors need to approve/merge the pull requests listed at
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%
> 3Apr+milestone%3AV1Editorial
>  (or indicate what's wrong with them)
> V1NonBlocking issues need to be moved to VNext, unless there is a proposed
> change that doesn't affect implementations and tests (and if that's the
> case, we'll need the proposed change in a pull request):
>  https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/3
> One of the editors need to provide input on:
> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/390
> Philippe
Received on Thursday, 18 May 2017 00:57:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:53:15 UTC