- From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 07:37:12 +0000
- To: "public-media-wg@w3.org" <public-media-wg@w3.org>
The minutes of yesterday's Media WG call are available at:
https://www.w3.org/2023/03/14-mediawg-minutes.html
Text version below.
The group reviewed MSE, Media Session, and EME issues in order to
clarify what the group intends to tackle in the next chartering period.
Thanks,
Francois.
Text version
-----
Media Working Group
14 March 2023
[2]Agenda. [3]IRC log.
[2]
https://github.com/w3c/media-wg/blob/main/meetings/2023-03-14-Media_Working_Group_Teleconference-agenda.md#agenda
[3] https://www.w3.org/2023/03/14-mediawg-irc
Attendees
Present
Bernard Aboba, Chris Needham, Eric Carlson, Eugene
Zemtsov, Francois Daoust, Gary Katsevman, Greg Freedman,
Jean-Yves Avenard, Jer Noble, Karl Tomlinson, Mark
Foltz, Peter Thatcher, Sushanth Rajasankar, Tommy
Steimel, Youenn Fablet
Regrets
-
Chair
Chris Needham, Jer Noble
Scribe
cpn, jernoble
Contents
1. [4]Media Source Extensions v2
2. [5]Media Session API
3. [6]EME
4. [7]TPAC planning
5. [8]Summary of action items
Meeting minutes
Media Source Extensions v2
cpn: Topics for this meeting:
… 1. Rechartering discussions lead to questions about MSE V2
and what is in-scope
… 2. Media Session API; feature prioritization and scoping
jya: we at apple have been working with Chrome with a solution
to low memory devices and eviction
… Are working on a new proposal, a Managed Media Source object,
with slightly different behavior from Media Source
… The big difference is that Managed Media Source will tell the
page when it wants to append data, and can evict data from the
buffer without interaction with the page
… It includes some ideas from MSE v2
cpn: Can you share the issue #s?
jya: No issues yet; exists in a Google Doc at the moment. Main
goal is just to get feedback from the community.
… Mostly a reaction to getting MSE working on low-power mobile
devices using high-power-usage 5g networks
cpn: lets look at the scoping first; and arrange for jya to
walk the group through the design of the API
gregwf: I'm working on getStatusForPolicy() but don't have an
update today
cpn: from the chartering perspective we don't appear to be
overcommitting ourselves.
[9]https://github.com/w3c/media-source/labels/
TPAC-2022-discussion
[9]
https://github.com/w3c/media-source/labels/TPAC-2022-discussion
cpn: Matt had identified issues (linked above) as the main
issues he intended to clean up for the MSE v2 work
dale: We on the chrome side don't have the bandwidth to move
forward anything that doesn't already have cross-browser buy in
jernoble: it seems we need to determine which are important for
v2 and which we could drop
dale: we don't have tests in the spec for promise, also play
through gaps is popular, but not something we have bandwidth
for
dale: the items that have already been landed in the spec are
those that have already received the most requests for
dale: we're limited on bandwidth for both spec and
implementation work
jernoble: something that might help with v2 is to get input
from the video developer folks from FOMS, to collect
requirements
… so before we drop doing the work, we want to directly involve
some of the developers
dale: a lot of the issues were already put forward by them, so
seems unfair to go back to ask them to prioritise
jernoble: we could ask at least. for example, something not
covered here is something that allows you to disconnect a media
source to another media element while maintaining the buffer
state
… it's something i hadn't heard before, but multiple engine
authors mentioned it
dale: there is an issue somewhere
cpn: anything from your point of view, mark?
mark: there's too many issues to say, i can do some work but
need to narrow it down to things that are already implemented
or where there's interest to implement
… we have workers and changetype already implemented and
specced. is there anything else in the list planned to
implement?
jernoble: i think some things in the list we'd like to roll
into the managed media source
dale: we could come up with a proposal and ask in the video-dev
slack
mark: we could set a timeframe, label issues as v3
dale: (in Webex chat): v2 = {changetype, workers,
managedmediasource?, maybe 1-2 video-dev requests?}
v3={everything else}
cpn: that seems like a good package of features that could be a
good v2
… Another thing we can do is reach out to the CTA-WAVE
community about features they would like in V2
… ACTION: Identify which issues are related to
ManagedMediaSource (jya)
<sushraja> is there a link to the managed media source proposal
?
<eric-carlson_> jean yves (in Webex chat): So this is an
explainer for the ManagedMediaSource we would like to propose.
It stemmed from [10]w3c/media-source#232 (comment)
[10]
https://github.com/w3c/media-source/issues/232#issuecomment-1249781923
<eric-carlson_> [11]https://docs.google.com/document/d/
1jJ0nse9i3cpE59mhSiq2ZKemCq1B5ZuLQ2UzqigIYLA/edit?usp=sharing
[11]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jJ0nse9i3cpE59mhSiq2ZKemCq1B5ZuLQ2UzqigIYLA/edit?usp=sharing
jya: Unfortunately I have to leave early
jernoble: Volunteers jya to identify which issues would be
covered by MMS
dale: I volunteer for bringing the smaller issue list to the
Video-dev community, after jernoble and jya have pulled in some
items covered by MMS into the v2 milestone.
markw_: Lets keep the v2 label but move all the current items
out, and create a new v3 label and attach it to all the
previously-v2 item.s
cpn: If there's anything we think is currently labeled as v2
and is moved out of scope that we apply a new (v3-proposed?)
label so as not to lose track
ACTION: Perform the v2 -> v3-proposed relabeling
ACTION: Identify which issues are related to ManagedMediaSource
(jya)
<markw_> Here is the new V2 milestone: [12]https://github.com/
w3c/media-source/milestone/8
[12] https://github.com/w3c/media-source/milestone/8
Media Session API
youenn: Since last meeting, Tommy and I have gone through the
open issues, mark them as enhancement as P1 or ready for PR
… we have some issues where we're not sure
… We might copy the MSE milestone approach
… We want some feedback on the selection, so wondering about
the best approach
… We're close to having a selection
… You identified a few issues needing prioritisation
discussion?
youennf: Yes, the longer we wait on some of these, the harder
they become to ship
… Is there consensus from user agents that we should tackle
them sooner rather than later?
… One issue involves a larger change, [13]#228
[13] https://github.com/w3c/mediasession/issues/228
<ghurlbot> [14]Issue 228 [open] Add a way of detecting which
actions a UA supports
[14] https://github.com/w3c/mediasession/issues/228
youennf: We could start a discussion on each issue, but we want
to know what the priority is
cpn: If we have the right people here we could look at the
prioritisation, without going into detail
youennf: Same-origin restrictions, we could do the same with
media session. Is there any interest from Chrome and Mozilla to
work on that?
… The two first issues relate to iframes, so in the same
buckegt
tommy: from Chrome point of view, I don't think we have plans
to implement those. if there's developer feedback to say
they're v1 worthy, we could look at it
youennf: difficult to restrict if only one browser is doing it.
this is why i'm cautious, and leaving to v2 would make it
harder
… so i'd be tempted to mark the feature policy integration as
v1, then hope that user agents can synchronize on shipping that
… so marking 221 is good? and 194, which is more feature level,
we could leave to v2?
tommy: seems good, 194 is an enhancement so less backwards
compatibility risk
youennf: 228 was being pushed by Chrome, can you check if
there's still interest to make the change and handle the
backwards compatibility issues?
tommy: i'll check with francois, to be sure
… seems like a developer ergonomics issue
youennf: that's all I wanted to talk about on media session
<Xiaohan> [I have questions on EME at the end if we still have
time]
EME
xaiohan: We have issues tagged as [15]EME v2 and [16]EME
v2-bugfixes. Do we still need to triage those for EME v2?
[15] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/5
[16] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/milestone/6
cpn: last time we discussed not pursuing the existing session
API
gregfreedman: are there issues that you want to get in FWPD?
xiaohan: I can look to see if there's anything important. If we
don't think those are important for EME v2, we can tag them as
v3
gregfreedman: We can talk later
xiaohan: Another issue related to EME storage, there's also DOM
storage, a clear-site-data header that sites can set. How
should EME persistent data behave?
<markw_> Both the milestones have been renamed: V3 and
V3BugFixes. We can move any that we intend to address in V2 to
the new V2 milestone.
xiaohan: I'll file an issue on that
cpn: i'd suggest only re-label issues if we need to
reprioritise. The main thing is getting the feature additions
for v2 FPWD
TPAC planning
cpn: TPAC is in September, would be good to know if you'd plan
to travel
… I'll raise a GitHub issue, please give an indication there
[adjourned]
Summary of action items
1. [17]Perform the v2 -> v3-proposed relabeling
2. [18]Identify which issues are related to ManagedMediaSource
(jya)
Received on Wednesday, 15 March 2023 07:37:17 UTC