- From: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:08:44 +0100
- To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear all,
The minutes of last week's telecon are available for review at
http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format
below).
Best regards,
Raphaël
------------
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
17 Nov 2010
[2]Agenda
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2010Nov/0029.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-irc
Attendees
Present
Thomas, Yves, Erik, Raphael, Silvia_(irc), Philip_(irc)
Regrets
Davy
Chair
Raphael
Scribe
Raphael
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]1. Admin
2. [6]2. Media Fragment Specification
3. [7]3. Media fragments URI on web page
4. [8]4. AOB
* [9]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 17 November 2010
trackbot, start telecon
<trackbot> Meeting: Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 17 November 2010
<tomayac> hamburg, germany, yes
1. Admin
<scribe> Scribe: Raphael
<scribe> Scribenick: raphael
PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 7th F2F meeting:
- [10]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/01-mediafrag-minutes.html
[10] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/01-mediafrag-minutes.html
- [11]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/02-mediafrag-minutes.html
[11] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/02-mediafrag-minutes.html
?
<erik> +1 (but am still reading it though :)
+1
<tomayac> pass ;-)
<Yves> +1
minutes accepted
2. Media Fragment Specification
For IBBT ...
ACTION-192?
<trackbot> ACTION-192 -- Davy Van Deursen to update the
specification to state what the processing should do when media
fragments request (time dimension) does not match exactly how the
media item has been encoded -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[12]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/192
[12] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/192
ACTION-193?
<trackbot> ACTION-193 -- Erik Mannens to make a schema for the
server redirect recipe -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[13]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/193
[13] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/193
ACTION-195?
<trackbot> ACTION-195 -- Davy Van Deursen to add a paragraph in the
section 7.1 to specify that video, audio, img or any href is all
treated similarly (range request issued when facing a media
fragment) -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[14]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/195
[14] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/195
ACTION-191?
<trackbot> ACTION-191 -- Yves Lafon to update the production rules
of the time dimension with the npt format for making the hours
optional -- due 2010-11-08 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[15]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/191
[15] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/191
Yves started to do it during the f2f meeting, needs to add a
sentence in the spec
ISSUE-19?
<trackbot> ISSUE-19 -- Parsing must be defined normatively in the MF
spec itself -- open
<trackbot>
[16]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/19
[16] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/19
Philip has proposed a number of patches, see result at
[17]http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/
overview.html
[17]
http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/overview.html
Yves has discussed this with Philip which sort of outdate this
proposal
Yves: the result is that we should keep the grammar as it is, + some
clarification text on the purpose of the grammar
... + a normative algorithm for parsing
... we need consensus and approval from Jack, Silvia, and Davy at
least in the group + feedback from the implementers
<silvia> is the proposal formally specified somewhere?
<silvia> I'm probably ok with it but don't want to give a blind vote
Raphael: what this clarification text should express?
<Yves> the purpose of the grammar is to describe the "normal"
syntax, ie: the one that should be created
<Yves> ie: it is not the parsing rules
Raphael: where we should write this ?
Yves: at the beginning of section 4 and appendix D
... as a reminder
<scribe> ACTION: raphael to add a clarification text regarding the
purpose of the grammar [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - raphael
<scribe> ACTION: troncy to add a clarification text regarding the
purpose of the grammar [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-199 - Add a clarification text regarding
the purpose of the grammar [on Raphaël Troncy - due 2010-11-24].
Raphael: regarding the parsing algorithm
Yves: back to a very detailed description of the algorithm
... I would like to read it crisp and procedural
... we need an agreement that the parsing algorithm become normative
... I would agree that given this clarification of role, the
algorithm become normative
Erik: I agree too
Silvia, would you have any objection of having a detailed parsing
algorithm of a media fragment URI nomative in the spec instead of an
annex?
Two versions of the algorithm
scribe: 1/
[20]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spe
c/#processing-uri-syntax
... 2/
[21]http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/
overview.html#processing-name-value-components
... and
[22]http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/
overview.html#processing-name-value-components
... and
[23]http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/
overview.html#processing-name-value-lists
[20]
http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/#processing-uri-syntax
[21]
http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/overview.html#processing-name-value-components
[22]
http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/overview.html#processing-name-value-components
[23]
http://people.opera.com/philipj/2010/11/04/media-fragments-spec/overview.html#processing-name-value-lists
<silvia> no objection here
Raphael: I agree to ask Philip to put which version he prefers
... the only contentious issue might be: 2.
2. Otherwise, the name-value pair does not represent a media
fragment dimension. Validators should emit a warning. User agents
must ignore the name-value pair.
Note: Because the name-value pairs are processed in order, the last
valid occurence of any dimension is the one that is used.
Raphael: Validators should perhaps emit an error rather a warning ?
... the processing order of the dimensions and whether parsing
should be relaxed or not in case of multiple occurences of the same
dimension (except track)
<scribe> ACTION: troncy to send a proposal to close ISSUE-19 that
consists in: clarification text + normative parsing algorithm
[recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-200 - Send a proposal to close ISSUE-19
that consists in: clarification text + normative parsing algorithm
[on Raphaël Troncy - due 2010-11-24].
<foolip> I prefer my latest version that uses the namevalues syntax
great, thanks Philip, we will use this one then :-)
3. Media fragments URI on web page
Raphael: started by a thread from Silvia
... discussed at the F2F meeting:
[25]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/02-mediafrag-minutes.html#item05
... lead to the notion of optimistic use of the Range header, only
for the 'second' unit
... it cannot be done for any other way for getting part of the
content
[25] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/02-mediafrag-minutes.html#item05
<silvia> (except that my email was about something completely
different ;-)
<Yves> yeah I think Silvia's email was about using the html fragment
for video
<Yves> which by default is => no (ie: it's per page, so you can't
generalize this)
<silvia> it was not to become normative - the idea is to propose a
syntax that people can choose to make use of
<silvia> because the html URI is much more important for most video
on the web than the video URI
Yves: there are 2 orthogonal issues
... the fragment applies to ONE resource you're retrieving
... if you want the fragment on the page be applied to the video
element on that page, this is your javascript that can do that,
nothing to put in the spec
... the other issue of optimistic use of the Range header, Philip
states that this is up to the URI spec to change
... I quote: "The semantics of the fragment identifier is defined by
each MIME type registration. Before we know the type, we can't
assume anything. Therefore, the only possibility is if the
URL/URI/IRI spec itself states that #t=1 has some semantics for
*all* types and that this should cause headers Foo and Bar to be
sent. However, I truly doubt we'll see media-specific things like
this put into URL/URI/IRI, it's seems like a gigantic layering
violat
<silvia> as I said: the idea is to give a Web developer that wants
to do media fragments on a Web page a recommendation for how to do
the URI structure on their page - they still have to implement it
themselves, it's just handy to agree on the same approach
<silvia> no need for more Range headers, or an implementation in
browsers or anything - just a helping hand for Web developers
Raphael: I agree silvia, and I strongly recommend to add a new
Appendix for what you propose, note to developers :-)
<foolip> Agreed, as long as there's no change in UA behavior for
#t=1 for HTML I'm fine with recommending web developers to use the
syntax
<silvia> btw: all the video hosting sites already have such
approaches in the URIs so it's not theoretic
<Yves> I agree that we can't assume anything, and we shouldn't break
any layer, but if we know enogh context, using Range request with a
unit that can only be applied to the media type we are targeting
(and will default to normal behaviour for all the others)
Silvia, would you like to have an action to write a paragraph, note
to developers, that they can easily implement a javascript to
forward the hash on the URI to the video element?
<Yves> is a (not nice) possible optimisation
<silvia> yup, no problem
<silvia> just don't know when I'll get around to it :)
<Yves> context should be that URI is in a <video> tag
<silvia> sure
<scribe> ACTION: Silvia to write a paragraph, note to developers,
that they can easily implement a javascript to forward the hash on
the URI to the video element [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-201 - Write a paragraph, note to
developers, that they can easily implement a javascript to forward
the hash on the URI to the video element [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due
2010-11-24].
Raphael: it is part of my action to clarify the use of optimistic
use of Range header optimization in case we are in the right context
<audio> or <video> element
4. AOB
Erik: what is the schedule?
<Yves> erik,
[27]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#Reports
[27] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#Reports
Raphael: finish all actions in the tracker by the end of the month,
so we can transition to CR
... have a telecon about test cases afterwards, for preparing the
exit CR stage
<erik> horay for Thomas!
<tomayac> thanks :-)
<tomayac> [28]http://tomayac.com/semwebvid/
[28] http://tomayac.com/semwebvid/
Raphael: we have discussed Ken Harrenstien
... from YouTube
<tomayac> funny enough ken and me have already been in contact with
regards to YT closed captions. i'll catch up with him and let him
know about recent developments.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: raphael to add a clarification text regarding the
purpose of the grammar [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Silvia to write a paragraph, note to developers, that
they can easily implement a javascript to forward the hash on the
URI to the video element [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: troncy to add a clarification text regarding the
purpose of the grammar [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: troncy to send a proposal to close ISSUE-19 that
consists in: clarification text + normative parsing algorithm
[recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]
[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, 24 November 2010 08:12:01 UTC