RE: [profile] A new TF for the TV Profile

I may have misspoke about the CEA2014. That aside, I have heard that DLNA has a TV Profile which may be almost identical to a CableLabs TV Profile. The said profile describes HTML5 capabilities and methods which pertain to a light-weight browser/HTML5-rendering-engine, the likes of which might be attractive to smart TV and other TV related devices (e.g. DLNA RUI devices) which might only support such a browser.

This TV Profile is not device specific but includes the ability to identify the capabilities of the device running the browser and/or display. It should apply to any type of display/screen.

a) This might be a good thing to compare to our ideas for a TV Profile.
b) It might be unnecessarily limiting to publish a TV Profile which is scaled down in consideration of current device capabilities.
c) I'm thinking that a TV Profile should actually be a subset of the overall HTML5 specification.
d) If our TV Profile is a subset of HTML5 which we view as pertinent to TV services (legacy, current and potential future feature sets) then perhaps we could also define groupings within the overall TV Profile which could be adopted for different scale platforms e.g. lite-browser, full-browser, etc. Each progressive group in the Profile would be a superset of the last smaller subset, from mini to medium to full or beyond.

Thanks!
-Paul

Q me



-----Original Message-----
From: Giuseppe Pascale [mailto:giuseppep@opera.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 3:31 AM
To: Scott Wilson; GAUSMAN, PAUL
Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
Subject: Re: [profile] A new TF for the TV Profile

On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 22:31:24 +0100, GAUSMAN, PAUL <pg2483@att.com> wrote:

> The DLNA group is looking at this under the heading of "web intents".
>
I don't think there is a relationship between web intents and the TV  
profile, they are two completely different things.

/g


> Thanks!
> -Paul
>
> Q me
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GAUSMAN, PAUL
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 4:32 PM
> To: 'Scott Wilson'; Giuseppe Pascale
> Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [profile] A new TF for the TV Profile
>
> Has anyone addressed a comparison or synergy of this with CEA-2014?  
> There's a DLNA group looking at this and I've heard it proposed that  
> there is overlap. They started some time ago. I'm just beginning to talk  
> with them.
>
> Thanks!
> -Paul
>
> Q me
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Wilson [mailto:scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:43 PM
> To: Giuseppe Pascale
> Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [profile] A new TF for the TV Profile
>
> On 19 Jan 2012, at 18:23, Giuseppe Pascale wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> given the interest in working on the TV profile as announced in [1], is  
>> probably good to start a new TF in charge of it.
>>
>> I'll work in the following days to create a wiki page for such new TF.
>> If someone is willing to chair this new TF, please let me know.
>> About phone calls, the idea was to start with bi-weekly calls, let me  
>> know if there are any objections to this.
>>
>> Finally, feedbacks on the profile document (that meanwhile got some  
>> more text) are welcome
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/tip/tvprofile/tv.html

>>
>> The document contains some open question you may want to share your  
>> opinion on.
>> Other open question where contribution are welcome are:
>>
>> - which technologies are fundamental for TV deployments and should be  
>> included in the profile?
>
> I think there needs to be a section on web application packaging and  
> metadata referencing W3C Widgets: Packaging and Configuration [1]; an  
> issue identified in several submissions to the Future of Offline Web  
> Applications meeting was competing non-interoperable packaging formats  
> affecting TV/STB web app deployment. Some vendors are already using  
> similar packaging formats (e.g Samsung's smart TV profile); there is  
> also work taking place in the Webinos[2] project on extending W3C  
> Widgets for TV applications.
>
>> - how do we address evaluation of performances?
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/tip/tvprofile/tv.html#performances

>> - what kind of input methods should be considered?
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/tip/tvprofile/tv.html#input-methods

>
> I think traditional Remote Control input methods are a basic requirement  
> for TV-based apps, as are virtual keyboards (most TV interfaces use both  
> in combination). Further down the line, there is Kinect-type camera  
> input coming from Samsung.
>
>>
>> Feel free to share your opinion but also to point to existing work in  
>> these areas.
>>
>> /g
>>
>> --
>> Giuseppe Pascale
>> TV & Connected Devices
>> Opera Software
>>
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/

> [2] http://dev.webinos.org/specifications/draft/tv.html



-- 
Giuseppe Pascale
TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software

Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 22:00:49 UTC