W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > August 2011

PDF version of CableLabs' proposal (ISSUE-38) (was Re: [HOME_NETWORK_TF] Minutes teleconference call 2011-08-02)

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 03:09:00 +0900
Message-ID: <4E3AE03C.3020808@w3.org>
To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
Hi all,

I've just noticed there was just an DOCX version of the proposal
on CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API at:
http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/RevisedAPI

So just added a PDF version to the above Wiki page for convenience.

Cheers,

Kazuyuki


On 08/03/2011 01:40 AM, Francois Daoust wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The minutes of today's Home Networking Task Force are available at:
> http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html
>
> ... and copied as raw text below.
>
> A number of issues were approved during the call, check resolutions taken in the minutes.
> Giuseppe will integrate them in the requirements document.
>
> Thanks,
> Francois.
>
> -----
> Home Networking Task Force Teleconference
>
> 02 Aug 2011
>
> [2]Agenda
>
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2011Aug/0010.html
>
> See also: [3]IRC log
>
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-irc
>
> Attendees
>
> Present
> Giuseppe, Kazuyuki, MattH, Francois, David_Mays, Aizu,
> Clarke_Stevens, Igarashi, Russell_Berkoff, mav
>
> Regrets
> Chair
> Giuseppe
>
> Scribe
> Francois
>
> Contents
>
> * [4]Topics
> 1. [5]TV Querying and Control
> 2. [6]Time Synchronization (ISSUE-21)
> 3. [7]Lip-Sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation (ISSUE-22)
> 4. [8]UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support (ISSUE-23)
> 5. [9]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Player
> (ISSUE-26)
> 6. [10]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Server
> (ISSUE-27)
> 7. [11]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media
> Controller (ISSUE-28)
> 8. [12]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Record
> Controller (ISSUE-29)
> 9. [13]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Device
> Controller (ISSUE-30)
> 10. [14]Next steps
> 11. [15]CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API Proposal
> * [16]Summary of Action Items
> _________________________________________________________
>
> <giuseppe> [17]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/2
>
> [17] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/2
>
> TV Querying and Control
>
> <giuseppe> ISSUE-20?
>
> <trackbot> ISSUE-20 -- TV Querying and Control -- open
>
> <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/20
>
> [18] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/20
>
> <MattH>
> [19]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussio
> ns/TVControl
>
> [19] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/TVControl
>
> matt: re-write proposal to better explain what could be
> standardized.
> ... The processing engine could be incorporated or not.
> ... There were some questions I hope I've addressed.
>
> giuseppe: comments on this?
> ... I don't have specific comments. I see different challenges. One
> thing I noticed is that it does not follow the same approach as
> other things we've discussed.
> ... Not a generic approach.
> ... On the use case, no problem it's fine.
> ... Any other comment, or can we conclude it's approved?
>
> proposed RESOLUTION: approve ISSUE-20
>
> RESOLUTION: approve ISSUE-20, TV Querying and Control
>
> <scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-20 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [20]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-58 - Integrate ISSUE-20 in requirements
> spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> Time Synchronization (ISSUE-21)
>
> <MattH>
> [21]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussio
> ns/TimeSynchronisation
>
> [21] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/TimeSynchronisation
>
> matt: Same here, re-wrote to better explain what's up for
> standardization.
> ... Regarding the time sync use case, the idea is to make it
> possible to be able to sync the content of their own app with the
> content played on the TV set.
> ... I believe we briefly described the prototype during the Berlin
> Workshop.
> ... Re-focusing is to highlight the fact that it's useful for an app
> to have a simple and clear API to access this type of information.
> ... It would be useful to have a high-level API that can enable
> these kind of applications and that abstract away the possible
> inconsistencies.
>
> Russell: I object, the existing discovery protocol address these
> issues, so I believe it's out of scope.
>
> matt: I was referring to the previous situation. In the new version,
> I refer to existing protocols that can be appropriate, so you're
> right.
>
> Russell: ok.
>
> giuseppe: comments on the content of the issue?
> ... then we can approve this as well
>
> RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-21, Time synchronization
>
> <scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-21 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [22]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-59 - Integrate ISSUE-21 in requirements
> spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> giuseppe: for some of these use cases, there could be an entity on
> the network that provides the service, so not necessarily a local
> API
>
> Lip-Sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation (ISSUE-22)
>
> <MattH>
> [23]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussio
> ns/LipSyncTimeSynchronisation
>
> [23] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/LipSyncTimeSynchronisation
>
> <giuseppe> ISSUE-22?
>
> <trackbot> ISSUE-22 -- Lip-sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation --
> open
>
> <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/22
>
> [24] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/22
>
> matt: related but with emphasis on needs for precise timing
> information, e.g. lip sync.
> ... The description here makes explicit the need to expose the
> accuracy that is available so that an app can determine whether it
> can do its stuff.
>
> giuseppe: thanks, any comment on this?
> ... OK, let's close this as well
>
> kaz: Matt, are you interested in not only lip-sync but also 3D, or
> animation, audio frame, or other multiple modalities?
>
> matt: I think these should be valid. We were more interested in
> audio at BBC, but I can see other purpose requiring accurate timing
> sync for other modality, yes.
>
> RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-22, Lip-sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation
>
> <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-22 in requirements
> spec. [recorded in
> [25]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action03]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-60 - Integrate ISSUE-22 in requirements
> spec. [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support (ISSUE-23)
>
> <giuseppe> ISSUE-23?
>
> <trackbot> ISSUE-23 -- UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support -- open
>
> <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/23
>
> [26] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/23
>
> Russell: Issue-23 is a use case to support the UPnP/DLNA ecosystem
> devices as-is within an application.
> ... There are a large number of currently deployed UPnP/DLNA
> devices, and having W3C user agents be able to support those devices
> would be beneficial for both orgs as well as for users.
>
> giuseppe: you didn't write any use case, right?
>
> russell: right.
> ... It's just to generate a requirement.
> ... There are specific use cases which are written later on, but
> this is a specific use case to require UPnP/DLNA support.
>
> Giuseppe: no comment. Any comment?
>
> Russell: I think there should be a requirement that maps to this
> issue.
>
> Giuseppe: OK, I can find a way to integrate that in requirements
> spec.
>
> RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-23, UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support
>
> <scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-23 in requirements
> spec. [recorded in
> [27]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action04]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-61 - Integrate ISSUE-23 in requirements
> spec. [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> kaz: comment on ISSUE-23. Clarify what you mean by W3C user agents?
>
> Russell: there are conceivably user agents that may not be browsers
> but something else.
>
> kaz: In that case, W3C specification compliant user agents. W3C does
> not produce user agents
>
> Russell: yes.
>
> Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Player (ISSUE-26)
>
> See [28]ISSUE-26
>
> [28] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/26
>
> Russell: question is whether it's enough to support various
> protocols, or whether we need to dig up in types of services exposed
> and expose e.g. media servers.
> ... [Going through requirements]. Requirement to list content that
> matches precise criteria on a media server for instance. Playback
> operation.
> ... View EPG data which may represent current content, also tune and
> play live content, and then select and play recorded content.
>
> Giuseppe: back to ISSUE-26, any comment?
> ... I don't think the use case is controversial.
> ... No problem with the use case itself.
> ... One problem I have with these use cases is that they all look
> different.
> ... We might want to re-write them for more consistency.
>
> Russell: I'm certainly willing to help.
> ... I tried to make the use cases and requirements consistent.
>
> Giuseppe: ok.
>
> RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-26, Home Network Enabled User-Agent -
> Network Media Player
>
> <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-26 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [29]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action05]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-62 - Integrate ISSUE-26 in requirements
> spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Server (ISSUE-27)
>
> See [30]ISSUE-27
>
> [30] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/27
>
> Russell: companion use case to previous one, to be able to serve
> content.
> ... Media server not necessarily local, could be in the cloud.
>
> Giuseppe: there's a specific reference to DLNA in things to
> standardize.
>
> Russell: I was just trying to clarify what the term Home Network
> Media Transport Requirements might entail.
> ... May I just change "mainly" into "possibly"?
> ... It was really just meant as a clarification.
> ... I'll go through the use case and take that out.
>
> Giuseppe: ok, fine.
>
> RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-27, Home Network Enabled User-Agent -
> Network Media Server
>
> <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-27 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [31]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action06]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Integrate ISSUE-27 in requirements
> spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Controller (ISSUE-28)
>
> See [32]ISSUE-28
>
> [32] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/28
>
> Russell: provides more details about what needs to be controlled on
> media that provides rendering.
> ... including closed captioning, camera angles, etc.
>
> Giuseppe: same as for ISSUE-27, DLNA mention remains.
>
> Russell: Yes, I'll go through all of these issues and adjust the
> wording.
>
> Giuseppe: ok, also approved, then.
>
> RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-28, Home Network Enabled User-Agent -
> Network Media Controller
>
> <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-28 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [33]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action07]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Integrate ISSUE-28 in requirements
> spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Record Controller (ISSUE-29)
>
> See [34]ISSUE-29
>
> [34] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/29
>
> Russell: different scenarios on controlling recorder, listed on the
> page.
>
> Giuseppe: Comments?
> ... Approved.
>
> RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-29, Home Network Enabled User-Agent -
> Network Record Controller
>
> <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-29 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [35]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action08]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Integrate ISSUE-29 in requirements
> spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09].
>
> Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Device Controller (ISSUE-30)
>
> See [36]ISSUE-30
>
> [36] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/30
>
> Russell: Control of a device, which we don't know anything about.
> There might be provisioning, e.g. home network management services
> while upgrading firmware. There's a whole slew of device types on
> top of media related services.
> ... This is a use case to control all sorts of devices.
>
> Giuseppe: given that this is generic, and that we already have
> approved generic use cases, does that add something?
>
> Russell: we do have Igarashi-san application use cases. But this is
> more control of non media devices on the home network.
> ... Usage will become increasibly important.
>
> Giuseppe: Yes, but requirements already covered by other issue, I
> think.
> ... High-level versus low-level.
>
> ISSUE-14?
>
> <trackbot> ISSUE-14 -- Document Discovering a Service -- closed
>
> <trackbot> [37]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/14
>
> [37] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/14
>
> <giuseppe>
> [38]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Requireme
> nts#U7._Application_Discovering_a_Service
>
> [38] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Requirements#U7._Application_Discovering_a_Service
>
> Giuseppe: The requirements doc is already updated to cover this.
>
> Russell: I might suggest that this gets merged with issue-14,
> provided there are no new requirements.
> ... One question that I have in mind. Is a device or service in
> these use cases the same as the device in the use case I'm
> providing?
> ... I think Jean-Claude mentioned the definition of a device as a
> list of services.
> ... I'm a little concerned about the definition section in the
> requirements doc.
>
> Giuseppe: it's for the scope of the document.
>
> Russell: I think we'll have to discuss devices vs. services
>
> Giuseppe: could you provide text for the requirements document?
>
> <scribe> ACTION: Russell to see if ISSUE-14 and ISSUE-30 can be
> merged [recorded in
> [39]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action09]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - See if ISSUE-14 and ISSUE-30 can be
> merged [on Russell Berkoff - due 2011-08-09].
>
> Next steps
>
> giuseppe: it would be nice to finish the document by the end of the
> month.
> ... I'll update it so that we can review it before the f2f meeting
> and approve it during the meeting.
> ... The idea would be to publish the requirements document, and then
> to add some section in the IG report about our findings.
> ... What should we do with CableLabs draft proposal?
> ... We need to know what we're going to do with other documents such
> as implementation alternatives.
>
> Clarke: hard to understand you right now, let's do a phone call and
> come up with a plan or something.
>
> CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API Proposal
>
> Giuseppe: question, Clarke, is what should the group do with this?
>
> Clarke: I'd like people to comment on it, see if it meets
> requirements.
>
> <kaz> [40]Wiki
>
> [40] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/RevisedAPI
>
> <kaz> issue-38?
>
> <trackbot> ISSUE-38 -- CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API
> Proposal -- open
>
> <trackbot> [41]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/38
>
> [41] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/38
>
> Clarke: Then look at this proposal and the one from Opera, see if
> they can be aligned.
> ... I'm working on an update to that document, which I can publish
> in the next couple of days.
>
> Giuseppe: [chunked], include in the report?
>
> Clarke: yes, I'd like to resolve as many obvious divergences as
> possible and then include in the report.
>
> Russell: I'm not necessarily favoring an API the way you propose
> [scribe missed precise concern]
>
> Clarke: when something is discovered, it calls a callback. I found
> it useful to combine things, but you could have your user agent to
> do otherwise. The basic idea of having discovery "routines" that
> calls a callback is pretty generic and doesn't predict any specific
> implementation.
> ... The same goes for request.
> ... If you want one callback for zeroconf, one for DLNA, etc. that's
> fine.
>
> Russell: something like REST call, does that require a callback?
>
> Clarke: what happens is that you send a message, and when you get a
> response, which is asynchronous, the callback gets called. A single
> routine could handle all your REST responses, or different routines
> could be used.
> ... Still, you send a request, then get a response.
>
> Russell: I might suggest that you write this in "here's the usage
> scenario" instead of providing an IDL, not very consistent with the
> way we've approaches other use cases.
>
> Giuseppe: The goal is more to capture how this could be implemented.
> ... It is not to become the specification, it's merely meant to
> suggest how an API could be defined.
>
> Russell: I suspect there is a use case knocking around in this
> document. I would encourage the writing of a use case based on this
> document. One concern is what happens to one device discovered with
> different methods? Is there a way to say that this is the same?
> ... I think it raises some interesting questions.
>
> Clarke: It's one way to implement the requirements triggered by the
> other use cases. It's certainly not the only one.
> ... I'm uncertain how this should be communicated to any working
> group that addresses these requirements.
>
> Giuseppe: my view on this is that we need to make sure the
> discussions are reflected on this document, then we can decide to
> publish it along with the requirements document to the intention of
> a working group.
> ... If it's already covered by another document, e.g. by Opera's
> proposal, then maybe we can drop it.
> ... We need to have opinions on this.
> ... The same applies to the Security document, actually.
>
> Clarke: I'll try to write something that tries to align CableLabs
> and Opera's proposals.
>
> Giuseppe: ok, running out of time, here.
>
> [call adjourned]
>
> <giuseppe> I hope you could hear what I was saying....
>
> <giuseppe> I was using skype, next time I'll use the phone
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> [NEW] ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-20 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [42]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
> [NEW] ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-21 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [43]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
> [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-22 in requirements spec.
> [recorded in
> [44]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action03]
> [NEW] ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-23 in requirements spec.
> [recorded in
> [45]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action04]
> [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-26 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [46]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action05]
> [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-27 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [47]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action06]
> [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-28 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [48]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action07]
> [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-29 in requirements spec
> [recorded in
> [49]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action08]
> [NEW] ACTION: Russell to see if ISSUE-14 and ISSUE-30 can be merged
> [recorded in
> [50]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action09]
>
> [End of minutes]
>
>

-- 
Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
Tel: +81 466 49 1170
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 18:08:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:04 UTC