- From: Daniel Davis <ddavis@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:26:44 +0900
- To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
Minutes from today's Media APIs Task Force call are available at:
http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html
and also as text below.
Daniel
---
Web and TV Interest Group Teleconference
16 Oct 2013
[2]Agenda
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0038.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-irc
Attendees
Present
Kaz, Bin, Daniel, Sheau, Olivier, Giri, wyhun
Regrets
Giuseppe, JC, Mark
Chair
Olivier
Scribe
Daniel
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Review of action items:
https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/agenda
2. [6]Review of gap analysis
3. [7]Next meeting
* [8]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 16 October 2013
<olivier> Meeting: Web and TV IG - Media APIs TF Teleconference
<olivier> -> Proposed agenda
[9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oc
t/0038.html
[9]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0038.html
<scribe> scribenick: ddavis
<scribe> scribe: Daniel
Review of action items:
[10]https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/agenda
[10] https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/agenda
olivier: Action 146, update use cases 6 & 7 has been done, no
objections.
<olivier> close action-146
<trackbot> Closed action-146.
<olivier>
[11]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Requirements
[11] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Requirements
olivier: Action 147, edit requirements doc & link to
spreadsheet - done.
<olivier> close action-147
<trackbot> Closed action-147.
olivier: Action 140, Sheau to split service & device discovery
in requirements doc.
<olivier> close action-140
<trackbot> Closed action-140.
Sheau: Done
<olivier>
[12]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Requirements#N
etwork_Selection
[12]
http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Requirements#Network_Selection
olivier: Action 141, requirement on network selection.
gmandyam: I just need to add hyperlinks on the Google
spreadsheet
<olivier> close action-141
<trackbot> Closed action-141.
olivier: If we're happy, let's close 141
... That's all the action items for this Task Force
Review of gap analysis
<olivier> * Gap Analysis on Requirement 9 "Context-based and
targeted Service Aggregation"
[13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013O
ct/0028.html
[13]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0028.html
<olivier> * Gap Analysis on Requirement 17 "Tuner Control"
[14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013O
ct/0029.html
[14]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0029.html
<olivier> * Gap Analysis on Requirement 18 "Channel
Identification"
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013O
ct/0031.html
[15]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0031.html
<olivier> * Gap Analysis on Requirement 19 "Content Streaming"
[16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013O
ct/0032.html
[16]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0032.html
olivier: There were a number of mails on the list about the gap
analysis
... Requirements 9, 17, 18, 19 had good suggestions of gaps
... All specs mentioned in those requirement analysis are not
W3C specs.
... We could look at those specs to see if they do what we need
and whether we need to add features to the web platform.
<olivier>
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013O
ct/0028.html
[17]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0028.html
olivier: Let's look at GA for Req 9.
... Related spec is Hybrid broadcastbroadband TV
... There are a number of gaps. ETRI people, please could you
talk more about it?
skim13: The existing spec has similar features to the
application we've defined.
<olivier>
[18]http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102700_102799/102796/01
.02.01_60/ts_102796v010201p.pdf
[18]
http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102700_102799/102796/01.02.01_60/ts_102796v010201p.pdf
skim13: Maybe we can re-use some of what's in the spec
olivier: So the recommendation is to re-use some of the
concepts, but we'll need to see how that relates to W3C-based
web platform architecture.
... Is there any volunteer to look into these features?
<scribe> ACTION: ddavis to look into what features of existing
non-W3C specs can be re-used in web platform for Gap Analysis
of Req 9 [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-152 - Look into what features of
existing non-w3c specs can be re-used in web platform for gap
analysis of req 9 [on Daniel Davis - due 2013-10-23].
<olivier>
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013O
ct/0029.html
[20]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/0029.html
olivier: Moving on to req 17
... There is a related spec that seems to have this feature
already
kaz: Does the action item for Daniel include other specs as
well, e.g. NHK's Hybridcast, not just HbbTV?
olivier: Possibly. Probably a good idea to start with just one
and see how we go.
<inserted> kaz: ok. So Daniel can start with HbbTV
olivier: Either we don't do anything or we need to integrate
something.
... E.g. GA for Req 17, the feature in the existing spec should
probably be replicated at the JavaScript level.
gmandyam: Is there are requirement for a specific format for
ESG? Is it left up to the service implementation?
olivier: Good question. I think what we were talking about is
that ESG is more of an implementation that uses several of the
requirements we have
... E.g. exposing channels and controlling them.
gmandyam: I agree with that. We support ATSC 3.0 which has
different requirements.
<Sheau> +q
gmandyam: I'm not seeing any direct dependencies on any
particular ESG so I think we're OK.
olivier: maybe we should clarify this when we publish our
findings.
... We might want to make it clear in our use cases.
... The Tablet EPG is somewhat similar.
<olivier>
[21]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Use_Cases
[21] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Use_Cases
<olivier>
[22]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Use_Cases#3._.
22Use_Case_Three_.E2.80.93_Tablet_EPG.22
[22]
http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs/Use_Cases#3._.22Use_Case_Three_.E2.80.93_Tablet_EPG.22
<olivier>
[23]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvACjV6qSvmxdE
ctdjYwa2JOalZLOG10elE1LVRZNlE#gid=0
[23]
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvACjV6qSvmxdEctdjYwa2JOalZLOG10elE1LVRZNlE#gid=0
olivier: The EPG use case is covered by a number of
requirements.
... That has been our approach so far - EPG/ESG are served by
our requirements.
Sheau: Some of these topics are probably going to be worked on
by ATSC 3.0 as well.
... So this gap analysis is looking back rather than looking
sideways. Other organisations are surely working on these
issues.
... I believe we have a liaison with some of these groups
already.
... What should we do?
gmandyam: With the ATSC, I'm putting together a draft with a
listing of the relevant requirements for v. 3.0.
... ATSC has already prepared a liaison, not sent yet.
... Starting with the gap analysis on the HbbTV doc will
satisfy a lot of the ATSC requirements, this group should
receive a liaison to take care of this.
Sheau: We're already very active on ATSC 3.0
... Maybe we can expedite things or explore further
gmandyam: These liaisons are being created by the ATSC S34
group which deals with the presentation layer.
olivier: Would we, as a group consider HbbTV or ATSC standards
good enough or would we need another specification elsewhere to
tackle these requirements.
... I would say as long as there's a way for us to refer to
those works in progress, we should say in our analysis when we
know of similar work elsewhere.
... It doesn't seem honest and useful to just ignore similar
external work.
Sheau: I wonder whether we would, through the liaison, put
forward our desire.
... Insofar as ATSC falls within an HTML/browser environment,
that falls inside HTTP protocol and we should ensure there is
minimal divergence between the two groups.
... If ATSC starts using HTTP or some W3C protocol, we need to
be aligned.
<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to count IPTVF-J as well, because they
already have an official liaison with W3C
kaz: We should include IPTV Forum Japan as well.
olivier: Does OIPF count as well?
... Should we have a liaison with OIPF as well?
kaz: We do have a liaison with OIPF as well
<kaz> [24]Liaison table
[24] http://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison
olivier: Let's move on - looking at the spreadsheet
<olivier>
[25]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvACjV6qSvmxdE
ctdjYwa2JOalZLOG10elE1LVRZNlE#gid=1
[25]
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvACjV6qSvmxdEctdjYwa2JOalZLOG10elE1LVRZNlE#gid=1
olivier: There are a number of existing W3C specs, at different
stages of progress, and the spreadsheet tries to match them
with our requirements.
... We should review and edit them a bit.
... In column G, Giuseppe asked the point of including this -
it's not a specification.
... I'd suggest dropping this because we have Media Source
Extensions to cover this.
+1
+2
<Sheau> +1
olivier: OK, done
... NSD API is the most worked-on column so far
ddavis: I had a hard time understanding the difference between
"aggregation of services" and "service discovery"
olivier: One way we can say that is that NSD allows you to
aggregate with some work by content creators on top.
... I think there are two meanings we should show in the table.
... One is that the spec doesn't cover it but it should (e.g.
red cross), the other is that we're not sure (e.g. a yellow
question mark)
... So a red cross would mean the requirement is not possible
with the current version of that spec.
... At the end of this process, we should have a number of
requirements for different groups - the red crosses would
indicate this.
... No objections - let's go with that symbol/colour choice.
... Giuseppe says, in row 8, column B, he doesn't think NSD is
in scope to handle authentication.
ddavis: Security is being discussed re. NSD API with the DAP
WG, so some kind of authentication could be being looked at.
olivier: Let's put it as a question mark.
... Tuner control, could this be covered by a different spec
and not NSD API?
gmandyam: The NSD API is meant to cover UPnP, Bonjour, etc.
... I thought tuner control was something more general than
that, so I don't know why you'd want to shoehorn that into NSD.
ddavis: I agree
olivier: Let's say there's some doubt as to whether this is the
right place for it.
... Given the difference in opinion, this is a question mark.
... Given the time, let's move on to column G which I've worked
on.
... Maybe we can then assign different columns to different
people.
... Column G is EME.
... At the bottom of the list of requirements, row 25 & 26, EME
is all about content protection.
... Looking at the spec, it seems that offline protection could
be taken care of by EME.
... EME only provides an interface to the content decryption
module (CDM).
... The CDM could be online or offline, so I think EME covers
this requirement.
Sheau: I'd like to confirm that with Mark Vickers.
olivier: I sent an email about this earlier which maybe Mark
can answer. I think it should be a "yes" but let's put it as a
question mark for now.
... I believe EME can also be used for device authentication
(row 8)
... Regarding row 11, Local Access Control, I don't know if
this is what EME should be able to do.
... So I'm putting that as a question mark
... Would anyone like to commit to looking into a particular
spec, for example WebRTC?
gmandyam: I can look into it, but in what context?
... WebRTC is a peer-to-peer tech - how does it relate to TV?
ddavis: Something like the "Device-to-device content transfer"
could be relevant.
gmandyam: There could be issues with content protection there.
<olivier> ACTION: gmandyam to look through WebRTC column in gap
analysis document - due in 2 weeks [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-153 - Look through webrtc column in
gap analysis document [on Giridhar Mandyam - due 2013-10-30].
olivier: There's already been an entry for Web Storage. Do we
have a volunteer to look at Web Storage and File API together
please?
Sheau: Generally we would want a qualification who knows
something about the particular spec, right?
olivier: Yes, even for a first pass, an educated guess would be
good.
Sheau: I would volunteer for either web Storage or Media Source
Extensions, but not within the next 2 weeks
<olivier> ACTION: Sheau to look through Web Storage column in
the gap analysis doc - due in 4 weeks [recorded in
[27]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-154 - Look through web storage column
in the gap analysis doc [on Sheau Ng - due 2013-11-13].
olivier: The goal is to have most of it done by the time we
meet at TPAC
ddavis: We should note in the spreadsheet who's looking at each
spec and whether the analysis has been done.
olivier: I'll do that at the top of each column.
... Any other specs that someone could take a look at? Would be
good to get about a half done.
... You don't have to be an expert - just read through the spec
a bit to understand it roughly.
<olivier> ACTION: olivier to look through MSE column in gap
analysis [recorded in
[28]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-155 - Look through mse column in gap
analysis [on Olivier Thereaux - due 2013-10-23].
<olivier> ACTION: bin to look through server-sent events
columns in gap analysis doc [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-156 - Look through server-sent events
columns in gap analysis doc [on Bin Hu - due 2013-10-23].
<olivier> ACTION: bin to look through push api column in gap
analysis doc [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-157 - Look through push api column in
gap analysis doc [on Bin Hu - due 2013-10-23].
olivier: Any other volunteers for another column?
ddavis: Manifest for Web Applications is probably not going to
be worked on further.
<olivier> ACTION: sheau to look through manifest/appcache
column, to be used as input for service worker - due in 4 weeks
[recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-158 - Look through manifest/appcache
column, to be used as input for service worker [on Sheau Ng -
due 2013-11-13].
<olivier> ACTIOM: sheau to look through messaging api column -
due in 4 weeks
<olivier> ACTION: sheau to look through messaging api column -
due in 4 weeks [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-159 - Look through messaging api
column [on Sheau Ng - due 2013-11-13].
ddavis: We can see what Manifest for Web Apps covers already,
but we probably can't get new features added to it. Instead,
they may be added to ServiceWorker.
olivier: Thanks everyone. We have some good coverage there and
can use the mailing list for me.
<olivier> ddavis: the W3C Business Development Team - we are
interested in work of the IG. put a summary into a slide deck
<olivier> ... and pointed to UC&R documents
<scribe> ACTION: ddavis to forward slide deck of use cases to
TV IG [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-160 - Forward slide deck of use cases
to tv ig [on Daniel Davis - due 2013-10-23].
Next meeting
olivier: Next meeting is on 30th October. Is that OK with
everyone?
... No objections so that's confirmed.
... That's all for today - let's continue on the mailing list.
... Thanks everyone, have a good morning/day/evening/night.
<kaz> [ adjourned ]
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: bin to look through push api column in gap
analysis doc [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: bin to look through server-sent events columns in
gap analysis doc [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: ddavis to forward slide deck of use cases to TV
IG [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: ddavis to look into what features of existing
non-W3C specs can be re-used in web platform for Gap Analysis
of Req 9 [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: gmandyam to look through WebRTC column in gap
analysis document - due in 2 weeks [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: olivier to look through MSE column in gap
analysis [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: sheau to look through manifest/appcache column,
to be used as input for service worker - due in 4 weeks
[recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: sheau to look through messaging api column - due
in 4 weeks [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Sheau to look through Web Storage column in the
gap analysis doc - due in 4 weeks [recorded in
[42]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/16-webtv-minutes.html#action03]
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [43]scribe.perl version
1.138 ([44]CVS log)
$Date: 2013-10-16 14:20:02 $
[43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[44] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2013 14:27:19 UTC