minutes of 2009-05-20 teleconference

All,

The minutes of today's telecon are available for review at
http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format
below). Thanks Michael for the scribing. Yves, could you please remove 
the DRAFT in the minutes ?

We have given 3 actions:
  * ACTION-80: Conrad to Provide some rational and use cases for his 
proposal
  * ACTION-81: Michael to update the TC discussion page with 204 
proposal and ask Yves's opinion on the list
  * ACTION-82: Michael to flesh out TC vocabulary re ISSUE-9
and one more ISSUE has been raised:
  * ISSUE-10: Media Fragments Test Case Maintenance

We should have this week some thread discussion on the mailing list for 
better understanding and comparing Conrad's proposal and the current one 
as written in the WD.
Cheers!

   Raphaël

--------
    [1]W3C
       [1] http://www.w3.org/
                                - DRAFT -
              Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
20 May 2009
    [2]Agenda
       [2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009May/0029.html
    See also: [3]IRC log
       [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-irc
Attendees
    Present
           raphael, mhausenblas, +0329331aaaa, davy, silvia, conrad,
           gui, +20592aabb, jackjansen, +1.818.061.aacc, +081806143aadd
    Regrets
           Erik
    Chair
           Raphael
    Scribe
           mhausenblas

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]ADMIN
          2. [6]UC & REQUIREMENTS
          3. [7]SPECIFICATION
          4. [8]TEST CASES (Michael)
          5. [9]ISSUES
          6. [10]IMPLEMENTATION
          7. [11]AOB
      * [12]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________



    <trackbot> Date: 20 May 2009

    Previous: 2009-05-13 [13]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/13-mediafrag-irc

      [13] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/13-mediafrag-irc

    <scribe> Scribenick: mhausenblas

    <conrad> heh

    <jackjansen> on my way

ADMIN

    raphael: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 13 May 2009 telecon:

    [14]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/13-mediafrag-minutes.html

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/13-mediafrag-minutes.html

    <davy> +1

    +1

    <raphael> +1

    <Gui> +1

    raphael: minutes approved

    ACTION-66

    ACTION-66?

    <trackbot> ACTION-66 -- Jack Jansen to look at the organisation of
    the 4th F2F meeting in Amsterdam on September 17-18 (just after IBC)
    -- due 2009-04-23 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [15]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/66

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/66

    close ACTION-66

    <trackbot> ACTION-66 Look at the organisation of the 4th F2F meeting
    in Amsterdam on September 17-18 (just after IBC) closed

    raphael: what shall we do jackjansen?

    jackjansen: not so much in a hurry. after IBC things here in A'dam
    are normal again
    ... that is we can wait a bit

    raphael: so we can wait till end of June

    jackjansen: silvia, we didn't pick the slot due to IBC in the first
    place
    ... but we wanted to have somethin in 09/2009
    ... other question. is any other place/time doable for the
    Aussies/SAfricans?

    raphael: alternative proposal was SAMT09, Graz, Austria

    Michael: not sure if it makes sense to rehash that topic

    raphael: we will ensure to have more virtual meetings as well
    ... the September meeting is still an option
    ... will be decided by end of June

UC & REQUIREMENTS

    raphael: no progress so far, will be done ASAP

SPECIFICATION

    <conrad>
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/UA_Server_HTTP_Co
    mmunication#Conrad.27s_proposal

      [16] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/UA_Server_HTTP_Communication#Conrad.27s_proposal

    UA Server HTTP Communication (Conrad/Raphael)

    conrad explains his proposal

    raphael: question regarding Accept-Range-Refer is similar to the
    original proposal?
    ... how is the conversion between sec and bytes done

    <conrad> bah

    <raphael> My first observation: Accept-Range-Refer ~= Accept-Ranges
    AND Range-refer ~= Range HTTP headers

    Michael: same here

    <Gui> what I remember from Conrad proposal is : 1. clarification on
    the order of fallback mechanisms and 2. more verbose HTTP headers

    raphael: 1. question is sec to bytes conversion

    conrad: Server is authoritative re conversion

    silvia: we should have a comparison of the three proposals on the
    table
    ... and having Yves on board would certainly help

    raphael: now we should focus on the # solution, move ? to the bottom

    jackjansen: I think we should keep the two as it might help
    establishing backwards compatibility, right conrad?

    conrad: correct

    raphael: ok, but we still need an overview table comparing the
    proposals
    ... I also miss the number of roundtrips
    ... seems always one, no?

    conrad: no, there are further requests

    ACTION-63?

    <trackbot> ACTION-63 -- Conrad Parker to update the Wiki with his
    more general approach with precisely the same examples -- due
    2009-04-23 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/63

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/63

    jackjansen: please give also a rational for it, esp. re the use
    cases you have in mind

    <scribe> ACTION: Conrad to provide some rational and use cases for
    his proposal [recorded in
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-80 - Provide some rationalee and use cases
    for his proposal [on Conrad Parker - due 2009-05-27].

    <jackjansen> s/ups/oops

    <jackjansen> :-)

    UA MF Resolution and Processing: (Michael)

    work continues

    raphael: so we continue to discuss via email

TEST CASES (Michael)

    raphael: we started to go through the TC last week

    [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCases

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCases

    <jackjansen> url?

    ACTION-79?

    <trackbot> ACTION-79 -- Michael Hausenblas to summarise the options
    for 4xx status code for empty TC0002-0007 in a Wiki page -- due
    2009-05-20 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/79

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/79

    close ACTION-79

    <trackbot> ACTION-79 Summarise the options for 4xx status code for
    empty TC0002-0007 in a Wiki page closed

    Michael: see
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCasesDiscussi
    on

      [21] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCasesDiscussion

    PROPOSAL: In case an 'empty response' (such as found in TC0002-0006)
    occurs, the origin server MUST send an HTTP 416 status code if and
    only if the fragment range was given in an HTTP Range request
    header, otherwise a HTTP 406 status code MUST be send.

    Michael: beside not knowing of other usages of 416/406 ...

    jackjansen: has it already been decided to be 4xx??

    <conrad> :)

    jackjansen: why not using 204?

    <davy> I think range 20-10 is the same error as 0-0 if we specify
    that the start has to be smaller than the end

    <raphael> Discussion about what *is* an empty fragment?

    <raphael> 204: a valid fragment but no content

    <raphael> 4xx: an error, because the UA has nothing to present

    <conrad> yeah :-(

    <scribe> ACTION: Michael to update the TC discussion page with 204
    proposal and ask Yves's opinion on the list [recorded in
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-81 - Update the TC discussion page with
    204 proposal and ask Yves's opinion on the list [on Michael
    Hausenblas - due 2009-05-27].

ISSUES

    ISSUE-3?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-3 -- Does our MF URI syntax imply that we need to
    update MIME Type registrations? -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/3

      [23] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/3

    ISSUE-4 ?

    ISSUE-4?

    <raphael> ACTION-73?

    <trackbot> ACTION-73 -- Conrad Parker to change the phrasing of the
    issue 4 (just audio/video)? -- due 2009-04-24 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/73

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/73

    conrad, re issue no. 4?

    <conrad> ok

    ISSUE-9?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- Should we have the media type inside the Test
    Cases? -- OPEN

    <trackbot>
    [25]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/9

      [25] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/9

    <scribe> ACTION: Michael to flesh out TC vocabulary re ISSUE-9
    [recorded in
    [26]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-82 - Flesh out TC vocabulary re ISSUE-9
    [on Michael Hausenblas - due 2009-05-27].

    <conrad> issue-4: so i think we discussed not predefining lots of
    track names, but perhaps predefining "audio" and "video" only: in
    which case action 73 would be to change issue 4 to "Should we
    predefine track names for audio and video"

    <trackbot> ISSUE-4 Should we pre-define some track names? notes
    added

IMPLEMENTATION

    raphael: to push implementations we need the proposals a bit better
    discussed
    ... all actions here continue

AOB

    [adjourned]

    <Gui> thanks, bye

    <conrad> thanks all

    silvia: good idea

    just send an email to the list with subject [MF-TC] or so proposing
    it

    I'll add it to the Wiki then, ok?

    <silvia> cool

    ta

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Conrad to provide some rational and use cases for his
    proposal [recorded in
    [27]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]
    [NEW] ACTION: Michael to flesh out TC vocabulary re ISSUE-9
    [recorded in
    [28]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: Michael to update the TC discussion page with 204
    proposal and ask Yves's opinion on the list [recorded in
    [29]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/20-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]

    [End of minutes]

-- 
Raphaël Troncy
CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science),
Science Park 123, 1098 XG Amsterdam, The Netherlands
e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093
Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312
Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/

Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2009 16:09:30 UTC