- 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