- From: Daniel Davis <ddavis@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 01:55:33 +0900
- To: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Hello all,
Here are the minutes for today's GGIE Task Force conference call:
http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-minutes.html
and pasted in full below.
Thanks to Bill Rose for scribing again.
Also, please note that the next call will be on Wednesday 20th May (NOT
6th May due to the W3C AC meeting).
With regards,
Daniel Davis
W3C
==========
Web and TV Interest Group Teleconference
22 Apr 2015
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-irc
Attendees
Present
glennd, Bill_Rose, paul_higgs, azamlerc, ldaigle,
digitaldale, NiloMitra, MarkVickers, ddavis
Regrets
Kaz
Chair
Glenn_Deen
Scribe
Bill_Rose
Contents
* [3]Topics
* [4]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<ddavis> trackbot, start meeting
<glennd> thank you
<trackbot> Date: 22 April 2015
<ddavis> Grrrr
Glenn called the meeting to order at 11:04
Glenn did a role call.
<azamlerc> Hi everyone! Andrew Zamler-Carhart at Cisco.
Bill Rose taking notes
<ldaigle> maybe did not leave last time?
<glennd> [5]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/08-webtv-minutes.html
[5] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/08-webtv-minutes.html
<ddavis> scribenick: Bill_Rose
Glenn posted link to the notes. Minutes were approved without
change.
<glennd> Use Review:
[6]https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF/UseCases/Content_
Capture#Use_Cases
[6]
https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF/UseCases/Content_Capture#Use_Cases
Glenn led a discussion on Content Capture Use Cases (see link)
Question: Discussing professional, non-prof or both?
Glenn: Lines are blurred. There are still differences but hard
to draw a line between.
Dale: IDs are generated for downstream consumption and there
are differences in consumption between pro and amature.
Glenn: Looking at YouTube there is no hard line in consumption
and workflows to post and consume.
Dale: The identifiers are produced for a usage. The association
of that data may be heavier in pro compared to consumer.
Glenn: Proposed approach - lump together until/unless a
difference is identified.
Dale: Good approach.
Glenn: Review Content Capture UCs
... UC-1 Basic Video Asset Capture
Assumes fixed bit-rate and resolution; stored on device; single
file or container with both audio and video with metadata about
video, camera, capture event, user, etc.
Glen: Step 5 in description is a mistake and should not be
included.
Glenn: Typically ID is added (e.g. YouTube) at time of
publication. Similar to adding SKU # by the store before
shelving.
... Some services can capture live video, upload to service for
posting. ID is added by service.
Correction: Some "users" can capture live video +"e.g. on a
phone"...
Glenn: This happens in near real time.
Dale: Can see this happening in ad insertion situation.
Glenn: Can also happen in social environment - e.g. a sports
event, etc., where each stream uploaded by individuals are all
associated with the same event but get different IDs added due
to different user captures.
... Capture-UC-2 Assigning a unique content identifier at asset
capture
... User captures a/v scene. Device obtains a content ID from
an issuing service.
Dale: Might the ID add an ID (if it does not have connection to
an issuing service) and later get a unique ID from the service?
Glenn: A UUID could be issued to the camera by an issuing
authority that is used by the camera to generate a unique
content ID for each video it records.
Dale: There could be multiple delegations - YouTube, Facebook,
EIDR, etc. Device could be pre-registered for each service it
posts to.
... Could this be extended to assemblages of content -
associated text, etc., which becomes part of the "content".
Glenn: That might be an extension, more sophisticated use case
... Think of this as a network of associated content where
multiple streams can be assembled into a composite stream for
final consumption
Dale: All of the various streams are associated through the IDs
for potential use in a composite - e.g. tributary streams that
can be assembled into final composited stream - potentially at
the end under direction of some actor - client, etc.
Glenn: New actor for the extended discussion above - the
composer, sponsor, user, etc., that does the composing function
to collect and bundle the tributary streams for consumption.
<scribe> ACTION: Item to Create new UC for the composite stream
concept discussed above. Include new actor. [recorded in
[7]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Error finding 'Item'. You can review and register
nicknames at <[8]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users>.
[8] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users
Andrew: Do we need to describe how the compositing process
would work including the Identifiers that allow different
composites to be uniquely identified
Glenn: Think it is necessary to identify the composites
uniquely.
Andrew: 2 ways to look at it: Things useful to editor(s) and
those that are useful to the user.
Glenn: gets into rights management which is out of scope.
Bill Rose: User could subscribe to a particular social user's
composite.
Glenn: Could be done by using a prefix associated with that
social user.
<scribe> ACTION: Item to Dale, Andrew, Bill - write UC to
describe the scenarios we discussed [recorded in
[9]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Error finding 'Item'. You can review and register
nicknames at <[10]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users>.
[10] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users
Leslie: Do we need to have a concept of an identifier of a
user/composer versus the identifier of a composite. Seem to be
mixing the two.
Glenn: Can have multiple prefixes for multiple '
personas'
<ldaigle> agree re. privacy
Glenn: Need to look at privacy here as well. How do we describe
this to include privacy. Instinct is there will be 2 concepts -
globally unique prefixes (permanent) and locally unique
prefixes that can be 'thrown away"
WebTV GGIE
Glenn: Think of it as the difference between a cell phone that
is bound by phone # to the user and a throw away phone that is
only loosely bound to the user not the users permanent phone #.
Andrew - Que: How do you distinguish between several "takes" of
the same scene versus different events on the same camera?
Glenn: Opportunity to explore how this could be handled but it
is out of scope for GGIE.
<scribe> ACTION: Item to Andrew - write up the question (above)
for posting. [recorded in
[11]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Error finding 'Item'. You can review and register
nicknames at <[12]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users>.
[12] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users
Glenn: Capture-UC-3 Fingerprinting and associating a content
identifier at asset capture
<ldaigle> @Bill — are you unmuted?
I am muted
<azamlerc> Folks, I need to run... I'll write up some of the
questions that I've raised. Cheers!
<ldaigle> who just sneezed....
<digitaldale> I will work to document the use case
<ldaigle> and sniffed
Glenn: UC-3 expands on UC-2 by generating a digital fingerprint
and registering it along with the unique content ID
... Content ID is obtained from the issuing authority which is
accitated with the fingerprint. Not a simple hash.
... Can generate same video fingerprint even with different
audio or video encodings
... Why not a watermark? For final products watermarks work
well. But not appropriate for capture because watermarks can
alter the original capture that could degrade the capture.
Fingerprint does not.
<digitaldale> watermarking may be better introduced downstream
which is tied to a commecial registration authority such as
EIDR or AD-ID
Glenn: Downstream services can still add watermark for many
reasons but for capture case a fingerprint might be more
useful/acceptable.
... Gap identied in each UC is there is no issuing authority
for the Content Identifier, prefixes, etc. that can be
referenced for these purposes.
<digitaldale> this way there would not need to be watermark
extraction or rewatermarking if the watermark is introduced at
the capture device and then reinserted later downstream
Glenn: In UC-3, no standardized fingerprint algorithm for this
purpose, and no issuing authority that can register the
fingerprint with the content ID
... Any other business?
Daniel: Want to encourage more participation in this work. If
anyone has any ideas to improve/broaden participation let us
know. Would like to do a monthly mailing on the activities
Que: Can we alert User Groups (Community Groups) to this work?
Daniel: Will look into how this can be done.
Perhaps LinkedIn Groups?
<ddavis> [13]https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF
[13] https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF
<ddavis> [14]https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page
[14] https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page
<ddavis>
[15]https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF#Participation
[15] https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF#Participation
Glenn: Next meeting is scheduled for May 6th which coincides
with W3C meetings in Paris. Should we skip that meeting or
reschedule?
... Propose skip May 6th and schedule May 20th as next meeting.
paul_higgs: If not addressing rights management, how about
policy relating to RM?
<ldaigle> LInked Content Coalition
Glenn: If we describe how rich metadata could be associated
with content, that could be used to point/link to RM services,
etc.
Daniel: On administration, we will be shifting to WebEx
sometime in June so the bridge will be changing around June.
<ldaigle> thanks! bye.
Glenn: Next meeting May 20th. Closed the meeting at 12:24 ET.
<ddavis> Meeting: Web and TV Interest Group Teleconference:
GGIE TF
<ddavis> Meeting: Web and TV Interest Group Teleconference -
GGIE TF
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Item to Andrew - write up the question (above)
for posting. [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Item to Create new UC for the composite stream
concept discussed above. Include new actor. [recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Item to Dale, Andrew, Bill - write UC to describe
the scenarios we discussed [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-webtv-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Received on Wednesday, 22 April 2015 16:56:09 UTC