- From: Philipp Hoschka <ph@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 17:40:59 +0100
- To: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Available at http://www.w3.org/2012/02/06-webtv-minutes.html Text version below === [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ - DRAFT - TV Profile Task Force 06 Feb 2012 See also: [2]IRC log [2] http://www.w3.org/2012/02/06-webtv-irc Attendees Present YoshiharuDewa, Nilo_Mitra, MarkW, Russell, Philipp, Johnsim, yosuke, Josh_Soref, giuseppe Regrets Chair giuseppe (opera) Scribe Johnsim Contents * [3]Topics 1. [4]Discuss charter for new task force 2. [5]Meeting Schedule 3. [6]Bug Tracking 4. [7]Profile-Spec 5. [8]AOB * [9]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ <scribe> Scribe: Johnsim <ph> can we identify who's on the call? or is this known already? <giuseppe> ph, are you on the call? <ph> yes <giuseppe> [10]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Agenda_Telco_6/2/2012 [10] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Agenda_Telco_6/2/2012 <inserted> scribenick: johnsim Discuss charter for new task force <giuseppe> [11]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Charter [11] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Profile/Charter Any comments on the goals? Watson: discussion on email is target of the profile and reason for profile - features or devices that support a set of features. ... device not support all the features - which is the typical problem with TV type devices Giuseppe: two parts - pure profiling part - maturity of the spec - depends on the group - reach a point where we can mandate a profile - if able to score X then you are in this category of devices. ... perhaps word "profile" - device and feature profiling. Watson: word "profile" is correct if features all selected from other documents ... versus defining new features - which would be specification work Giuseppe: would not make sense to mix the two - if nothing complete enough to be used then we go to the working groups and get the external document complete and we can reference from the profile ... The profile should not contain the specification but the reference, but if there is no specification, go out to the other groups to get spec done Watson: : range of devices and not just TV; but because TV have limited processing capacility that we need this work. and some additional capabilities, like tuners, so it all gets down to device capabilities, i think Giuseppe: parts of these document apply to all devices Watson: things generic (like DRM) being discussed in other activities. if all devices had same capabilities we would not need profiles ... generally applicable features should be dealt with elsewhere. it is only because devices cannot met all features we need this profiling at all Meeting Schedule Giuseppe: may need calls every 2nd or 3rd week - or once a month - if all the discussion on the list easy for all to participate <yosuke> +1 +1 Giuseppe: once a month? Or perhaps don't need calls and call for it when we need it Philipp: once a month. Check point once a month is good. Giuseppe: once a month Bug Tracking Giuseppe: don't have project yet [in Bugzilla-- the proposed bug tracker]. will announce it when ready. and in monthly call go through the bugs and get this discussed. does this work for everybody? Profile-Spec Giuseppe: last thing on agenda [12]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/tip/tvprofile/tv.html [12] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/tip/tvprofile/tv.html AOB Giuseppe: any other business? ... keep discussing on the list, call on first Monday of the month. Thanks. Summary of Action Items [End of minutes] _________________________________________________________ Minutes formatted by David Booth's [13]scribe.perl version 1.136 ([14]CVS log) $Date: 2012/02/06 16:35:28 $ _________________________________________________________
Received on Monday, 6 February 2012 16:42:01 UTC