W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > August 2012

minutes 14 August 2012, HTML Media Task Force MSE

From: Matt Womer <mdw@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:05:15 -0400
Message-Id: <F3089AE8-251D-4CD1-B771-B450220C5BBE@w3.org>
To: public-html-media@w3.org
HI all,

Minutes for today's teleconference are here:
	http://www.w3.org/2012/08/14-html-media-minutes

And as text below.

It was a pleasure to meet you all, and I look forward to working with you.

-Matt Womer
W3C/MIT Staff

--
   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                  HTML Media Task Force Teleconference

14 Aug 2012

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Aug/0006.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2012/08/14-html-media-irc

Attendees

   Present
          +1.425.888.aaaa, Clarke, NiXu, acolwell, matt,
          +1.310.210.aabb, +1.415.867.aacc, adrianba, ddorwin,
          markw, paulc, +1.303.661.aadd, BobLund, pal_,
          Mark_Vickers

   Regrets
   Chair
          paulc

   Scribe
          Matt

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Roll call
         2. [6]Previous minutes
         3. [7]Review Actions
         4. [8]Baseline documents and Bugzilla information
         5. [9]Actions from the previous meetings
         6. [10]New Bugs
         7. [11]Actions from previous meeting
         8. [12]Candidate Media Source Extension bugs for
            discussion
         9. [13]Any other business?
     * [14]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 14 August 2012

   <scribe> Scribe: Matt

   <Johnsim> zakim aagg is me

   <Johnsim> zakim aaaa is me

Roll call

   matt: Hi, I'm Matt. I'll be helping out as part of the work on
   Web and TV. I'm at MIT, so I'm on East Coast time.

Previous minutes

   paulc: No comments on those.

   ->
   [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012J
   ul/0096.html Previous Minutes

     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0096.html

Review Actions

   paulc: There weren't any in tracker, but there were some
   informal ones that I put in the agenda.

Baseline documents and Bugzilla information

   ->
   [16]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/media-source/
   media-source.html Draft

     [16] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/media-source/media-source.html

   ->

   &bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtyp
   e=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0
   -0-0=noop&value0-0-0= Bugzilla

Actions from the previous meetings

   <paulc>
   [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012A
   ug/0003.html

     [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Aug/0003.html

   ->
   [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012J
   ul/0003.html

     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0003.html

   /

   Aaron?: I don't think there's anything to talk about they're
   done.

   paulc: Bug 17739 and Bug 18389 are resolved

   -> [19]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18389 Bug
   18389

     [19] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18389

   <acolwell>
   [20]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18550

     [20] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18550

New Bugs

   paulc: The new bugs in item six are in the encrypted media
   group and I'll deal with those at the next meeting.
   ... Both of them?

   <paulc> Note that bugs 18515 and 18531 are both EME bugs

   -> [21]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18550 New
   bug

     [21] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18550

   acolwell: Provides a definition for TrackID

   paulc: Does that propose a solution?

   Aaron: Just need to figure out the text to put in there.

   paulc: Timetable?

   Aaron: Next call.

   INFORMAL ACTION: acolwell to propose a solution for 18550
   before next meeting

Actions from previous meeting

   -> [22]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18400 Bug
   18400

     [22] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18400

   paulc: Previous notes said markw will address by this call.

   markw: I posted a proposal to the bug, they were descriptive
   rather than text proposals. No comments yet, so next step is
   text proposal.
   ... One question: sometimes you don't know where the media ends
   in a segment that has been appended. This can happen in a video
   with subtitles, there's a subtitle between 5s and 10s, but then
   you don't know which portion is addressed by that segment.
   ... If you have the exact information about how the timeline is
   covered, then you don't need that feature. There's a case of
   the mp4 format ??? despite having the span, that information is
   made available to the application.

   <markw> regarding the mp4 format, the information about the end
   of the segment not in the segment, but is in the segment index

   <paulc> Aaron responded in
   [23]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18400#c4

     [23] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18400#c4

   acolwell: For the most part I agree with Mark on his proposal.
   There's only one section that doesn't get to how long the
   segment is and causes a problem. Should we mandate that media
   segments have some form of duration information in them?
   ... I think that might be what markw was advocating, or at
   least in ISO you already know it.
   ... If we require the duration, then we need to change the WebM
   text as it's not required there.

   markw: The information isn't there itself but it's available to
   the application. You could imagine adding to the API that that
   information is added when you append.

   paulc: Next step?

   INFORMAL ACTION: markw to reply to Aaron's response to bug
   18400 comment 4 by next meeting

   -> [24]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17001 Bug
   17001

     [24] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17001

   paulc: Any action on this?

   <paulc> Bob's response is here:
   [25]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17001#c1

     [25] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17001#c1

   acolwell: I did contact Bob, didn't CC list. He had commented
   back that he was okay with the changes. So I closed the bug.

   RESOLUTION: bug 17001 (
   [26]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17001) FIXED

     [26] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17001)

   -> [27]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17000 Bug
   17000

     [27] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17000

   adrianba: We haven't worked on this, the encrypted work is a
   higher priority.

   INFORMAL ACTION: adrianba and Johnsim to look at bug 17000
   before next meeting.

   -> [28]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17002 Bug
   17002

     [28] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17002

   paulc: On this one we were trying to decide to close this bug
   and make a new one, adrianba said we should retitle it.
   acolwell said he'd look at the history.

   acolwell: I retitled the bug and added a comment.

   <acolwell>
   [29]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17002#c7

     [29] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17002#c7

   <paulc> New title: Specify a mechanism to determine which
   SourceBuffer an AudioTrack,VideoTrack, or TextTrack belong to.

   acolwell: Also posted a message to the list to ask for people
   to look at it.

   ->
   [30]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012A
   ug/0008.html acolwell mail on updated bug 17002

     [30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Aug/0008.html

   paulc: Anyone have comments on this now?
   ... It would help if people would indicate support. Please
   don't think you only have to respond in the negative.

   -> [31]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17006 Bug
   17006

     [31] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17006

   acolwell: This goes back to the DASH spec, and this asks what
   level of support do we want. DASH allows language and kind to
   be set on each different track. Depending on how you allow
   this, you could have track language change mid playback.
   ... It needs to be scoped a bit better for where it is allowed
   to be changed.

   markw: What scenarios do you think those properties would
   change in DASH?

   acolwell: language and role (which is kind in HTML) that could
   be applied to both adaptation-set? and component? Seems like
   you could have multiple ?? in a adaptation-set.

   markw: Those are required to have the same properties at the
   ??adaptation?? level.
   ... If you had a adaptation set with three in it, all three
   would have the same values.

   acolwell: I need to start a thread to discuss this. When I
   looked at the mpeg spec, it looked like there could be
   trickiness involved.

   INFORMAL ACTION: acolwell to start a thread on bug 17006

   <markw> the trickiness is that a single source buffer can map
   to multiple HTML track if the media is multiplexed

   BobLund: The media component would provide an override and if
   you had a component that each would -- if you had an mpg2
   transport with mp3, etc, and each would map into audio, video
   and text track.

   acolwell: Do you need to be able to update each track's kind
   and language or groups of these? Is it at source buffer level
   or track level?

   BobLund: I don't know if there's anything in the DASH spec that
   would prohibit that. We've talked about ?? and that would be a
   new source buffer.

   markw: I'm not sure how you could match up the media components
   and the multiple tracks provided from a single source buffer.

   BobLund: That's another issue actually.

   -> [32]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17072 Bug
   17072

     [32] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17072

   paulc: We said at the last meeting that this might not be
   relevant.

   acolwell: Yes, most of the remaining issues are covered by what
   Mark is working on. Closed it, left a comment and pointed
   forward to new bug.

   paulc: So that one is done.

   acolwell: Bug 17072 was marked resolved won't fix.

   -> [33]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17094 Bug
   17094

     [33] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17094

   Define segment formats for MPEG2-TS

   paulc: acolwell You suggested this might be controversial and
   need to talk it out.

   acolwell: No progress made. Still pending.

   ??: I don't know if someone on the call is championing this
   one, they might be best to advocate for it.

   paulc: This was filed by Duncan from BBC. Not on the call
   today.
   ... I don't see him participating in the dialog at all.

   BobLund: I'll volunteer to champion this.

   paulc: Perhaps do a PRO/CON list on the list for taking action
   on this

   BobLund: Will do and will close the loop with Duncan on this.

   -> [34]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16998 Bug
   16998 Change sourceAppend() to take a URL and optional range
   parameters

     [34] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16998

   paulc: We talked about splitting this bug at the last meeting.
   ... It wasn't obvious if we'd made progress on that or not.

   acolwell: No, I haven't split the bug.

   paulc: So this one is still pending.

Candidate Media Source Extension bugs for discussion

   paulc: I have a feeling we've touched on all of the bugs in
   this discussion.
   ... So, we've made some real progress here.

Any other business?

   paulc: Any other business?
   ... Matt, will you be scribing future meetings?

   matt: Attending, scribing no.

   markw: What's the timeline?

   paulc: If we can get the bugs closed, there are only 7 still
   outstanding, publish and bring it to the group. If we can make
   substantive progress over 2 weeks, and assume we don't get them
   all closed, then a month from now get the remaining ones.
   ... That would put us mid-september, and we could put it to the
   group then. They should be doing a heartbeat publication then,
   and perhaps get us on the same schedule.
   ... I suspect we'll have to give the WG a few weeks to review
   the document.
   ... But, our first objective is to close this round of bugs.
   ... The feeling before was that we could move this and EME
   forward separately.
   ... At the other meeting, I predicted a single digit number of
   weeks away from going back to the WG. So, I think we're on
   schedule, but the bar to get over is to close these last 7
   bugs.
   ... Scribe in two weeks?

   <no one>

   paulc: Please clean the minutes and send to the media list.
   ... Adjourned.

   s|s///||

   s|s/->
   [35]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012J
   ul/0003.html/||

     [35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0003.html/

   s|[36]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=a
   dvanced&short_desc_t.*||

     [36] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_t.*

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [37]scribe.perl version
    1.136 ([38]CVS log)
    $Date: 2012/08/14 16:03:06 $

     [37] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [38] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 16:06:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 15:48:25 UTC