RE: webtv-ISSUE-63: Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) Testing [testing]

Of course, it is ok with me.

In fact, during the conference call this morning, both of us have been assigned an action item to work on this.

Thanks
Bin

-----Original Message-----
From: Vickers, Mark [mailto:Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 12:11 PM
To: Giuseppe Pascale
Cc: Web and TV Interest Group
Subject: Re: webtv-ISSUE-63: Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) Testing [testing]


On Apr 3, 2013, at 5:35 AM, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com> wrote:

> we can probably discuss them here as well as share the outcome with the Media TF once we are done.
Agree.

> 
> Maybe we could integrate these comments into issue-63 (and then discuss them?)
> 
> Mark/Bin what do you think?
OK with me, if OK with Bin.

> 
> /g
> 
> 
> On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 04:59:22 +0200, Vickers, Mark <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> 
>> I don't know if this is input for the Web&TV Testing TF or the HTML WG Testing TF, but there are a few additional kinds of EME testing that I think need to be tested somewhere:
>> 
>> 1. CDM portability: 1 CDM type, 2 browsers, 1 stream
>> This would be a test of whether two browsers using the same type of CDM can decode the same encrypted stream. For example, if BrowserA and BrowserB both include support for the XYZ CDM, the test would be whether BrowserA and BrowserB can both decode and display the same stream that is meant to be decoded by the XYZ CDM. This could be tested on both clear-key and non clear-key CDMs.
>> 
>> 2. Common Encryption: 2 CDM types, 2 browsers, 1 stream
>> This would be a test of whether two browsers using different types of CDM can decode the same encrypted stream. For example, if BrowserA supports XYZ CDM and BrowserB supports UVW CDM and if both XYZ and UVW support the same common encryption format, the test would be whether BrowserA and BrowserB can both decode and display the same stream using two different CDMs. This must be tested on two non clear-key CDMs.
>> 
>> 3. HTML/CSS transformations: 1 CDM, 1 browser, 1 stream
>> This would be a test of whether a CDM correctly transforms the video given a variety of HTML and CSS transformations, such as scaling, rotation and occlusion. This could be tested on both clear-key and non clear-key CDMs.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> mav
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 28, 2013, at 3:44 PM, Web and TV Interest Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> webtv-ISSUE-63: Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) Testing [testing]
>>> 
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/63
>>> 
>>> Raised by: Bin Hu
>>> On product: testing
>>> 
>>> Provide comprehensive test suite for HTML5 Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) specification to enable playback of protected content, and related use cases ranging from simple clear key decryption to high value video.
>>> 
>>> Motivation:
>>> 
>>> HTML5 EME extends HTMLMediaElement to allow JavaScript to select content protection mechanisms, control license/key exchange, and implement custom license management algorithms.
>>> 
>>> It supports a wide range of use cases without requiring client-side modifications in each User Agent for each use case. This also enables content providers to develop a single and robust application solution for all devices (TVs / STBs, smart phones, tablets and PCs etc) supporting a range of content decryption and protection technologies.
>>> 
>>> Supporting EME Testing will accelelate the time-to-market of EME-enabled device, offer the consumers with EME-enabled video services and provide end users with better user experience without dependency on Flash or SilverLight.
>>> 
>>> Dependencies:
>>> User Agent support is required as the JavaScript library needs to be extended to support EME.
>>> 
>>> What needs to be standardized:
>>> User Agent needs to be exposed with EME-enabled JavaScript library.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Giuseppe Pascale
> Product Manager TV & Connected Devices
> Opera Software

Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2013 19:43:25 UTC