Re: Media Task Force F2F meeting at HTML WG F2F, Santa Clara, Oct 30-31

On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Vickers, Mark <
Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com> wrote:

>   On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
>  wrote:
>
>>             Please reply to this thread and indicate your attendance
>> plans and/or if you support the TF meeting F2F on Fri Oct 31 AM.
>>
>   I will be attending both days and I’m fine with the Media TF meeting
> either day.
>
>
> On Sep 29, 2014, at 2:57 PM, Aaron Colwell <acolwell@google.com> wrote:
>
>  I wasn't planning on attending TPAC unless there was a strong desire to
> meet F2F for MSE. As far as I can tell people are just heads down
> implementing and filing bugs when they run into issues.
>
>
>  I don’t want to slow down the implementations (!), but there are some
> big issues to discuss in each spec, particularly the EME HTTPS issue (bug
> 26332) and the MSE seamless splicing issue (bug 19673 et. al.). The F2F
> would seem convenient and timely to discuss these.
>

I'm not going to comment on EME. I realize there is much to discuss on that
front, but I don't need/want to be part of that conversation.

Bug 19673 is resolved and all followup bugs were either resolved or
deferred to a v2(i.e. post PR). The goal was to get basic splicing
supported by all implementations first and then refine it in followup
versions of the spec if necessary. I don't think it makes sense to change
things until implementations actually support what is currently specified
since that seems like a minimal splicing bar. If we can't do that
interoperably then there really isn't much point to specifying something
more complicated.

There is currently only 1 open bug
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=runnamed&list_id=44664&namedcmd=open%20MSE%20bugs>
against
MSE CR at the moment and I anticipate it to be resolved before TPAC so I
don't really see any point in attending right now. I still don't plan on
attending TPAC, unless there are bugs filed against MSE that we actually
plan on resolving for CR and they require significant realtime discussion.
At a minimum, I think this means that any new issues would need to be filed
and discussed on at least one Media TF call before TPAC.

Aaron


>
> Thanks,
> mav
>
>  On Sep 29, 2014, at 2:57 PM, Aaron Colwell <acolwell@google.com> wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>
>  I wasn't planning on attending TPAC unless there was a strong desire to
> meet F2F for MSE. As far as I can tell people are just heads down
> implementing and filing bugs when they run into issues. I've also just been
> waiting for approval on the updated tests I submitted
> <https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/1238> so I think progress
> is being made on the test front as well. I don't think I have much to talk
> about at this point.
>
>  Aaron
>
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>>  The HTML WG will be holding a F2F meeting on Oct 30-31 in Santa Clara,
>> CA during the TPAC week.  At previous TPAC meetings, the Media TF has met
>> to discuss one or both of MSE and EME.
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2014/11/TPAC/
>>
>>
>>
>> The draft agenda for the HTML WG F2F meeting is at:
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2014-10-Agenda
>>
>>
>>
>> As a straw man proposal I suggest the TF request at least 2 hours and
>> possibly 3 hours of time on the morning of Fri Oct 31.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please reply to this thread and indicate your attendance plans and/or if
>> you support the TF meeting F2F on Fri Oct 31 AM.
>>
>>
>>
>> /paulc
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
>>
>> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
>>
>> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>