Re: Media Resource In-band Tracks Community Group Launched

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Olivier Thereaux <
Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk> wrote:

> On 22 Oct 2013, at 17:07, public-council@w3.org wrote:
>
> > With your support, the Media Resource In-band Tracks Community Group has
> been launched:
> >  http://www.w3.org/community/inbandtracks/
>
> It is surprising that this CG appears to have been proposed, voted up and
> created without any prior discussion in the web and TV IG:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013Oct/
>
> Unless I am mistaken, this is rather close in scope to some of the work we
> are trying to get done in the Media APIs TF, isn't it?
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Media_APIs
>
>
Let me explain the history of this.

This is also a follow-up on something that was discussed and agreed a while
ago in the IG (in various TFs) and we never got around moving forward. The
needs for this was already identified by the MPTF work and during the
discussion about a TV profile, but we never took the "next step".

There is an overlap with what the media API TF is doing, true, but since
some of the requirements are already clear we though was better to start
the CG anyway to accomplish what was already agreed. The Media API work
will probably contribute with some more things to add.

Also, the idea was not to move forward silently, but to create the group
and then bring up to the IG to ask people to sign up for it (in order for
people to be able to sign up, the group had to be created).



> > This group will develop a specification defining how user agents should
> > expose in-band tracks as HTML5 media element video, audio and text
> > tracks so that Web applications can access the in-band track
> > information, through the media element, in a interoperable manner across
> > user agent implementations.
> >
> >
> > Media formats of interest are MPEG-2 transport stream, WebM and MPEG-4
> > file format. Other media formats containing in-band tracks may be
> > considered.
>
>
> This isn't just a case of “Why wasn't I consulted”.

I am worried that this will have an impact on the momentum of the Media
> APIs TF, which we are somewhat struggling to keep up already.
>
>
I don't think so. This will give a better idea of where to work on the next
steps for some of the things we are discussing in the media TFs. So it may
actually help people to have a better view of the full process.

Once again the work on this will start on things that were already
discussed and agreed a while ago, I expect the Media TF to add on top of
that



> Regards,
> --
> Olivier
>
>
> -----------------------------
> http://www.bbc.co.uk
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
> may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless
> specifically stated.
> If you have received it in
> error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the
> information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
> immediately.
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
> sent or received.
> Further communication will signify your consent to
> this.
> -----------------------------
>