Re: {minutes} TTWG Meeting 2015-10-01

Le 02/10/2015 10:46, Nigel Megitt a écrit :
> On 02/10/2015 08:16, "Cyril Concolato"
> <cyril.concolato@telecom-paristech.fr> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Le 01/10/2015 18:40, Nigel Megitt a écrit :
>>> PROPOSAL: Draft a WG Note describing the profile short name
>>>      registry and updating the IANA media registration, based on
>>>      what's in the current profile registry wiki page plus the
>>>      addition of the codec parameter to the existing TTML media type
>>>      registration.
>>>
>>>      nigel: Does that address Cyril's concern about using the codec
>>>      profile?
>> My concerns were that:
>> a) if the registry is a note, it should not contain normative material
>> b) the registry does not confuse people by redefining what MPEG defines
>> c) the use of the identifier would be beneficial even outside of MPEG
>> files, in particular for plain TTML over HTTP.
>>
>> a) has been addressed by some clarifications that Mike made.
>> b) is partially addressed as the 'stpp' row is still there.
> Just to be clear, what further action is needed to completely address b)?
I would like the row to be deleted.
>
>> c) is addressed by the IANA update.
>>>      mike: Yes, without going into all the details, the RFC is out
>>>      of date, but we can independently
>>>      ... proceed here with tidying up, to resolve any public use or
>>>      adoption. Cyril is concerned
>>>      ... more globally about non-W3C infrastructure issues. We can
>>>      solve ours locally.
>> I'm not sure what this means, which RFC you are talking about or what
>> you mean by "non-W3C infrastructure issues".
> This was intentionally vague for the minutes. We can discuss offline if
> you want to know more.
>
>> FYI, the next MPEG meeting is at the end of October. Can the Note be
>> published by then? In any case, can I ask that the group makes a liaison
>> to MPEG informing about that Note so that MPEG can decide on using it
>> for defining its codecs parameter?
> If we have a version of the Note ready in time then I'd be happy for us to
> send a liaison to MPEG.
>
> If we do not have a version ready in time then we could at least send a
> liaison to MPEG informing them about our intended approach.
Perfect, thank you.

Cyril

-- 
Cyril Concolato
Multimedia Group / Telecom ParisTech
http://concolato.wp.mines-telecom.fr/
@cconcolato

Received on Friday, 2 October 2015 09:23:37 UTC