- From: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:28:48 +0100
- To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear all, [with the good URI and subject header!] The minutes of this week's telecon are available for review at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format below). Thanks Conrad for having scribed (added to the ScribeList). Cheers. Raphaël ------------ [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference 17 Feb 2010 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2010Feb/0037.html See also: [3]IRC log [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-irc Attendees Present Jack, Yves, Raphael, Silvia, Michael, Conrad, Erik Regrets Davy Chair Erik, Raphael Scribe Conrad, Raphael Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]1. ADmin 2. [6]2. F2F Agenda 3. [7]3. SPECIFICATION 4. [8]4. Test Cases 5. [9]5. AOB * [10]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ <trackbot> Date: 17 February 2010 Silvia, are you planning to join? <mhausenblas> ACTION-140? <trackbot> ACTION-140 -- Michael Hausenblas to create a more readable version of the TC classification at [11]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/mftc -- due 2010-02-17 -- OPEN [11] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/mftc <trackbot> [12]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/140 [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/140 <mhausenblas> [13]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ [13] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ <mhausenblas> [14]http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2F www.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc2html.xslt&xmlfi le=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc .rdf&content-type=&submit=transform [14] http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc2html.xslt&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc.rdf&content-type=&submit=transform 1. ADmin Accept the minutes at [15]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/10-mediafrag-minutes.html [15] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/10-mediafrag-minutes.html <mhausenblas> +1 +1 <jackjansen> +1 2. F2F Agenda F2F Meeting [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/FithF2FAgenda [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/FithF2FAgenda <conrad> raphael: the agenda is open for suggestions 3. SPECIFICATION <conrad> * ACTION-134: Erik to mark up the spec with normative and informative classes [postpone?] <conrad> * ACTION-139: Silvia to mark up specified sections as implementable <conrad> raphael: silvia is not here but she has done 138 and 138 (?) <conrad> close action-138 <trackbot> ACTION-138 Include Erik's diagrams into specification closed <conrad> close action-139 <trackbot> ACTION-139 Mark up specified sections as implementable closed Current document: [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spe c/ [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/ <conrad> raphael: regarding section 5.1.3 <Yves> [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spe c/#processing-name-value-lists [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#processing-name-value-lists <conrad> raphael: silvia thinks we should also mark it as implementable <conrad> raphael: the only thing refraining her from that atm is an objection from jack <conrad> raphael: jack notes that we have not yet concluded if an unspecified dimension should be a zero or not <conrad> raphael: we need to decide how strict/lax we need to be with interpretations of the spec <Yves> what happens with [19]http://www.example.com/foo.m4a#t=12-20&this_is_not_a_mediafrag will return a valid mediafrag using 5.1.3 [19] http://www.example.com/foo.m4a#t=12-20&this_is_not_a_mediafrag <conrad> jack: i still think that being relaxed is fine, but if something is over-specified, such as specifying two time prefixes or two spatial prefixes, there would be too much scope for error <conrad> jack: for every cascading rule you can find a use case, where one overrides or extends the other <conrad> jack: i don't feel confident about stating that one rule can handle 90% of cases <conrad> jack: if there is no clear rule, eg. saying t=100,200&t=20,40, then how should that be interpreted? there are 3 obvious possible interpretations, and each has people backing it <conrad> jack: i'm perfectly happy with name=value pairs we don't understand, that is up to implementations <conrad> jack: if there is a name=value pair that we do understand, we should be stricter about that <conrad> yves: this is test 3e (?) -- we should be clear about handling of things that are not recognized, partial media fragments etc. <conrad> yves: a validator should provide errors <conrad> jack: i agree <conrad> raphael; for a good combination of things that we can recognize, jack is saying that we shouldn't try to understand what they are doing, but specify a rule <Yves> things that can be recovered could be close strings, like xyhw -> xywh (obvious typo) <conrad> jack: yes, according to our spec it should throw an error <conrad> jack: just like we cannot accept id and t combined should give the same result as two t's combined <jackjansen> My pref would by: replace all "Any previously set value is discarded" with "it is an error if a value was previously set" <conrad> silvia: we need to resolve how these ambiguous cases and combined parameters are handled <conrad> silvia: i think what jack in particular objected to was philip's suggestion that any previous key=value settings are discarded on error <erik> rssagent, draft minutes <Yves> +1 to error instead of discarding <conrad> jack: i would suggest that instead of discarding newly set disallowed values, an error should be thrown <conrad> jack: from a (parser/UA) implementors point of view, simply discarding seems simpler, but a content author may expect cascading <Yves> I can think of an intersection of t #t=10,20&t=6,12&intersect <Yves> not a mediafrag => mediafrag recognition fails <conrad> jack: i cannot see of a clear rule that prefers discarding or cascading, so we should just specify an error Jack: we cannot find a general way for cascading rules, so throw an error <Yves> (defined in another spec, for example) <conrad> silvia: i agree -- discarding would just encourage lazy programming <conrad> yves: if there is no specification for an intersection, no problem, but in our case if we don't flag an error then we have to specify it as a valid media fragment <conrad> yves: i agree that it should be an error <conrad> conrad: what is an error <conrad> raphael: it is not a media fragment <conrad> silvia: it must be simply discarded and the fragment cannot be resolved as a media fragment <conrad> silvia: [analogy to html page] <jackjansen> We seem to have moved to 5.1.5 <conrad> raphael: but in the case of an HTML UA, everything is happening within the UA, not on the network <conrad> silvia: i think it is the same for both html and media resources <jackjansen> (and I think that that editorial that is attributed to Michael is actually mine:-) <conrad> silvia: case 1) for html if the # cannot be resolved, the full resource is displayed yes Jack, but you defer it to Michael a long time ago :-) <conrad> silvia: for media, if the # cannot be understood, the whole resource is shown from the beginning <jackjansen> good:-) <conrad> silvia: case 2) if the resource has previously been loaded: same behaviour, HTML goes to top of page, media should go to the beginning <conrad> raphael: perhaps we should merge section 5.1.3, 5.1.5 on these topics <conrad> jack: for error handling, i think we should make sure that put this in informative text not normative text <conrad> jack: because the best case for handling an error is up to the application <Yves> also authoring tools should report errors <conrad> jack: in the case of eg. pay-per-view content the UA may offer to interfere and confirm with the user <conrad> silvia: i agree Raphael: there is the proposal of making 5.1.5 into a full section 6 <conrad> silvia: michael, did you get a chance to review the list of error cases presented last week <mhausenblas> Michael: I agree <jackjansen> silvia, url? <mhausenblas> silence == agreement ;) <conrad> silvia: 5.1.5: we need to look at errors in each of the dimensions (time, track, id) <conrad> silvia: and then if we look at combined dimensions then we need more cases <conrad> silvia: hence i'm suggesting to make it into a full section <scribe> ACTION: Conrad to add a paragraph in the section 5.2.1 that further clarify the role of the UA for rendering a media fragment [recorded in [20]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01] <trackbot> Created ACTION-141 - Add a paragraph in the section 5.2.1 that further clarify the role of the UA for rendering a media fragment [on Conrad Parker - due 2010-02-24]. <mhausenblas> hey! <Zakim> mhausenblas, you wanted to note re appendix <conrad> michael: i would prefer to have the POV of an implementer that needs/wants to run the test cases <conrad> michael: from implementer's pov it should be as easy as possible to do their [verification?] work <scribe> scribenick: Raphael <scribe> scribenick: raphael <jackjansen> +1 Suggestion: replace all "Any previously set value is discarded" with "it is an error if a value was previously set" in 5.1.3 and remove editorial note of Jack <silvia> +1 <mhausenblas> s/Suggegstion/Proposal: +1 <Yves> +1 <mhausenblas> +1 <conrad> +1 RESOLUTION: replace all "Any previously set value is discarded" with "it is an error if a value was previously set" in 5.1.3 and remove editorial note of Jack <scribe> ACTION: Troncy to apply this change in the section 5.1.3 (jack's note) [recorded in [21]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02] <trackbot> Created ACTION-142 - Apply this change in the section 5.1.3 (jack's note) [on Raphaël Troncy - due 2010-02-24]. Raphael: Providing this change, can we mark this section as implementable? Jack: adding one more note about id? Silvia: I would just say that everything concerning the time dimension is implementable, the rest is still under discussion Jack: I would not move 5.1.5 in an Appendix Silvia: I would move a section 6 and see later if we move it in an appendix depending the length of the document <scribe> ACTION: Silvia to move 5.1.5 into a new section [recorded in [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03] <trackbot> Created ACTION-143 - Move 5.1.5 into a new section [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2010-02-24]. Raphael: Section 5.1.1 is related to ISSUE-13 ISSUE-13? <trackbot> ISSUE-13 -- Write a IETF draft for proposing how to register the fragment scheme for all media types -- OPEN <trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/13 [23] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/13 Silvia: move this section to the top after the introduction <scribe> ACTION: Silvia to move the section 5.1.1 to the top [recorded in [24]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action04] <trackbot> Created ACTION-144 - Move the section 5.1.1 to the top [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2010-02-24]. Raphael: Section 5.1.4, general interpretation of media fragments, we have so far a HTML5 browser type of UA in mind ... What are the other UA we are talking about? Silvia: I'm not sure if we should say that all browsers should render the same way ACTION-141? <trackbot> ACTION-141 -- Conrad Parker to add a paragraph in the section 5.2.1 that further clarify the role of the UA for rendering a media fragment -- due 2010-02-24 -- OPEN <trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/141 [25] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/141 Silvia: perhaps start this discussion within the HTML5 fora <conrad> a non-browser UA could be a video editor as a consumer of media fragments Jack: maybe we should turn the rendering into a new section as well Silvia: I like that too Jack: so we have sections about Syntax, Formal processing and then Guidelines and Errors Silvia: how far we should go in terms of saying something about rendering of a media fragment is still a matter of discussion Raphael: other UA ... video editor, qt player, youtube/dailymotion iPhone app, etc. Silvia: I will start this dicussion thread within the Accessibility task Force of the HTML5 WG <jackjansen> but also think non-rendering apps (metadata annotation) Silvia: there are developers there that will udnerstand what we are talking about Raphael: I'm uncomfortable with the fact that sections 3, 4.1 and 5.1.1 are marked as non-normative ... could we just comment that? Silvia: I tend to ignore that, I rather looked at implementable or not 4. Test Cases ACTON-140? ACTION-140? <trackbot> ACTION-140 -- Michael Hausenblas to create a more readable version of the TC classification at [26]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/mftc -- due 2010-02-17 -- OPEN [26] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/mftc <trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/140 [27] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/140 [28]http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2F www.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc2html.xslt&xmlfi le=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc .rdf&content-type=&submit=transform [28] http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc2html.xslt&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2008%2FWebVideo%2FFragments%2FTC%2Fmftc.rdf&content-type=&submit=transform <mhausenblas> [29]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ [29] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ Michael: just simple table layout ... do you have any suggestions? close ACTION-140 <trackbot> ACTION-140 Create a more readable version of the TC classification at [30]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/mftc closed [30] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/mftc 5. AOB Silvia: I have mentionned a list of errors for the time dimension ... I would appreciate if we could include that into the TC ... and add them in the Section 6 ... it would be good if could agree on that Michael: I will add these TC in the good place (my action-118) by next week Raphael: ok, so we discuss that next week [adjourned] <mhausenblas> FYI: I've now updated [31]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCasesOverview [31] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/TestCasesOverview <mhausenblas> so that there is a direct link to the MFTC categorisation and tabular rendering <mhausenblas> cya <mhausenblas> Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: Conrad to add a paragraph in the section 5.2.1 that further clarify the role of the UA for rendering a media fragment [recorded in [32]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01] [NEW] ACTION: Silvia to move 5.1.5 into a new section [recorded in [33]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03] [NEW] ACTION: Silvia to move the section 5.1.1 to the top [recorded in [34]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action04] [NEW] ACTION: Troncy to apply this change in the section 5.1.3 (jack's note) [recorded in [35]http://www.w3.org/2010/02/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02] [End of minutes] _________________________________________________________ -- Raphaël Troncy EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department 2229, route des Crêtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France. e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242 Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200 Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/
Received on Wednesday, 17 February 2010 14:29:51 UTC