- 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