Re: minutes of 2011-01-19 teleconference

Hi Raphael, all,

I'm still trying to recover from a really bad jetlag, but I will take
care of this. I think it's due really soon for us to elevate this to
an issue. Will find out.

Cheers,
Silvia.

2011/1/19 Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>:
> Dear all,
>
> The minutes of today's phone telecon are available for review at
> http://www.w3.org/2011/01/19-mediafrag-minutes.html (and in text format
> below).
>
> We have planned the following 3 next telecon:
>  - 26/01/2011: final spec review and new LC approval by the group
>  - 02/02/2011: invitation of Adisson to address ISSUE-17 [I18N in track
> names]
>  - 09/02/2011: review of test cases
> We expect a maximum participation for these 3 telecon.
>
> @Silvia, we discussed last week the fact that you should mail the group
> about which more HTML5 bugs you would like to open given Ian closed bug
> 10723. We conclude today that what is important to add in the HTML5 spec is
> the specification when the fragment should be stopped (only the starting
> time is specified currently), see my comment 11. Do you want to open such a
> bug or do you want me to do it?
> Best regards.
>
>  Raphaël
>
> -------------
>   [1]W3C
>      [1] http://www.w3.org/
>             Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
> 19 Jan 2011
>   [2]Agenda
>      [2]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Jan/0027.html
>   See also: [3]IRC log
>      [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/19-mediafrag-irc
> Attendees
>   Present
>          raphael, Yves, +329331aaaa, Erik, Davy, +31.20.592.aabb, Jack
>   Regrets
>          Thomas, Silvia
>   Chair
>          Erik, Raphael
>   Scribe
>          yves
> Contents
>     * [4]Topics
>         1. [5]1. Admin
>         2. [6]spec
>         3. [7]HTML WG liaison
>         4. [8]Implementation
>         5. [9]Open issues
>         6. [10]test cases
>         7. [11]AOB?
>     * [12]Summary of Action Items
>     _________________________________________________________
>
>   <trackbot> Date: 19 January 2011
>
>   <raphael> Regets: Thomas, Silvia
>
> 1. Admin
>
>   damn!
>
>   <raphael> scribe: yves
>
>   <raphael> scribenick: Yves
>
>   approval of last week minutes
>
>   <raphael> +1
>
>   <Yves> +1
>
>   <davy> +1
>
>   RESOLUTION: minutes approved
>   [13]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/12-mediafrag-minutes.html
>
>     [13] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/12-mediafrag-minutes.html
>
> spec
>
>   Philip sent some patches that needs to be incorporated in the spec
>
>   As we did lots of changes, we need another LC (that will be short).
>
>   I would like that we decide on the LC next week
>
>   aiming for 3 weeks review time
>
>   any objection with the plan?
>
>   <erik> no
>
>   <hackerjack> no
>
>   Davy: do I have to include RTSP in the spec before next week?
>
>   Raphael: yes
>
>   Davy: I will try
>
>   document changed a lot in december but not a lot since then
>
>   we need to rephrase slightly the part of the spec about SMPTE
>   timecodes
>
>   also new video codec don't have fixed framerates, we need to address
>   that
>
>   jack: 99.99% of existing movies files will have fixed framerate even
>   if the format allows dynamic framerate
>
>   raphael: we need to address this case
>
>   Jack: starting to rethink my position on that issue, it makes sense
>   to present the whole fragment in that case
>
>   should it be implementation notes?
>
>   Raphael: in the final document, the things that we may remove
>   because of lack of implementation might go in a non-normative
>   appendix
>
>   Yves: fine as long as it is clear that it's not normative and there
>   because of lack of implementation
>
>   Davy: variable framerate is usually not implemented as the encoder
>   needs to communicate with the packager, and not sure it's
>   implemented now. Also SMPTE time codes at a frame-basis should be
>   there
>
>   Jack: how about implemetation ?
>
>   Davy: might try to get one at least partial
>
>   Jack: if people are interested in that, they should demonstrate
>   their interest with code, even if it's a toy implementation
>
>   Raphael: would like to invite Addison to discuss issue 17 about IRI
>   and track names
>
>   would feb 2 be ok? (ie: get critical mass here)
>
>   <raphael> I18N discussion:
>   [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2010Ju
>   n/0056.html
>
>     [14]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2010Jun/0056.html
>
>   raphael: we also need to dedicate a complete telcon on test cases.
>
>   erik: will issue 19 be solved by next week?
>
>   raphael: yes
>
> HTML WG liaison
>
>   <raphael> Bug:
>   [15]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10723
>
>     [15] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10723
>
>   Bug was rejected because it was multiple things in one bug, Silvia
>   had an AI to open several bugs
>
>   <raphael> I have been dropped :-(
>
>   Yves: only the last one about having to stop at the end of the
>   fragment needs reopening
>
> Implementation
>
>   action 204 will be dropped
>
>   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 204
>
>   the header syntax should be checked in the tests
>
> Open issues
>
>   RTSP will be added soon
>
> test cases
>
>   Davy has some updates on that front
>
>   <raphael> drop ACTION-204
>
>   <davy>
>   [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Ja
>   n/0025.html
>
>     [16]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Jan/0025.html
>
>   <davy>
>   [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases
>
>     [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases
>
>   <davy>
>   [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases
>
>     [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/server-test-cases
>
>   <davy>
>   [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases
>
>     [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases
>
>   raphael: wondering about server-side tests
>
>   davy: we need extra test cases, yes
>   ... but we have the template for test cases
>
>   Raphael: there are two things to check, URI parsed as it should and
>   HTTP request sent as it should, and the second point is to verify
>   the behaviour (graphical)
>
>   jack: if we have a client saving the file, we can do automatic
>   testing
>
>   Yves: but there are things that we can't test that way (like
>   displaying the complete timeline)
>
>   Raphael: a few things needs to check manually, which is fine
>
>   Jack: we need to check what SVG or CSS people are doing to test
>   graphical output
>   ... also if the number of manually tests is small...
>
>   s/manually tests/manually verifiable tests/
>
>   Jack: the first thing is to review all the current tests
>
>   Davy: we have also an issue with sources for tests
>
>   Raphael: can we make files or is transcoding too difficult?
>
>   Jack: ffmpeg might help there
>
>   Raphael: please ask on the ML.
>
>   <hackerjack> yes
>
> AOB?
>
>   <raphael> One question: should we use one of the movies in the spec
>   and in the test cases ?
>
>   Raphael: should we use in the test cases one of the movies we have
>   in the agenda? (ie: one with the right license)
>
>   <raphael> * Sintel: [20]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc
>
>     [20] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc
>
>   <raphael> ** longer version,
>   [21]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ
>
>     [21] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ
>
>   <raphael> * Big Bunny:
>   [22]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk
>
>     [22] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk
>
>   <raphael> * The Elephant Dreams:
>   [23]http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream
>
>     [23] http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream
>
>   <hackerjack> I would prefer not to use the suggested movies
>
>   <davy>
>   [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/media/spatial_30fps.we
>   bm ?
>
>     [24] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/media/spatial_30fps.webm
>
>   Jack: we should create synthetic movies, easier to do checking (like
>   switching backgrounds on boundaries we are about to tests)
>
>   <davy>
>   [25]http://ninsuna.elis.ugent.be/Media/MFWG/TC/spatial_30fps.mp4?tra
>   ck=3;1
>
>     [25]
> http://ninsuna.elis.ugent.be/Media/MFWG/TC/spatial_30fps.mp4?track=3;1
>
>   erik: should we drop all the AI assigned to Michael?
>
>   raphael: safe ot drop them
>
>   Erik: we need to talk about use cases as well (from Shiraishi San)
>
>   <Nobu> Thank you, I am on IRC now.
>
>   Erik: also who is attending the workshop in Berlin?
>
>   Raphael: no
>
>   Erik: I should be there
>
>   ADJOURNED
>
>   <Nobu> I
>
>   <raphael> Nobu: we agree to continue the discussion on your use case
>   on the mailing list
>
>   <raphael> please, create a wiki page if you want
>
>   <Nobu> I see, thanks.
>
>   <raphael> The Use Cases and Requirements document is sort of "on
>   hold" ... which means, we will update it at the end of the rec track
>   process
>
>   <raphael> * Sintel: [26]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc
>
>     [26] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac7KhViaVqc
>
>   <raphael> ** longer version,
>   [27]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ
>
>     [27] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ
>
>   <raphael> * Big Bunny:
>   [28]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk
>
>     [28] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk
>
>   <raphael> * The Elephant Dreams:
>   [29]http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream
>
>     [29] http://www.archive.org/details/ElephantsDream
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
>   [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 Friday, 21 January 2011 12:39:25 UTC