W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > December 2019

Minutes from W3C M&E IG monthly call 3 Dec 2019

From: Chris Needham <chris.needham@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 15:44:09 +0000
To: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <590FCC451AE69B47BFB798A89474BB366B9B8993@bgb01xud1006>
Dear all,

The minutes from the Media & Entertainment Interest Group call on Tuesday 3rd November are now available [1], and copied below.

Our next call is planned for Tuesday 7th January. Agenda TBD.

Kind regards,

Chris (Co-chair, W3C Media & Entertainment Interest Group)

[1] https://www.w3.org/2019/12/03-me-minutes.html

--
- DRAFT -
Media and Entertainment IG
03 Dec 2019
Attendees

Present
    Kaz_Ashimura, Chris_Needham, Song_Xu, Takio_Yamaoka, Andreas_Tai, Xabier_Rodriguez_Calvar, Francois_Daoust, Garrett_Singer, Gary_Katsevman, Glenn_Goldstein, Pierre-Anthony_Lemieux, Peipei_Guo, Barbara_Hochgesang, Nigel_Megitt, Huaqi, Rob_Smith, Steve_Morris, Larry_Zhao, Yajun_Chen, Kazuhiro_Hoya

Regrets

Chair
    Chris, Pierre

Scribe
    kaz

Contents

    Topics
        Introduction
        Bullet chatting
        Media production use cases
        Web of Things
        Next IG call
    Summary of Action Items
    Summary of Resolutions

<scribe> scribenick: kaz

# Introduction

Chris: We have 3 topics today: Bullet Chatting TF, Media production use cases, Web of Things.

<cpn> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MJPcV3Lz_zxia1nUYHySJKCdB2QJpSLNsLwkOsod0Y8/edit Slides

Chris: Anything else for today?

(none)

# Bullet chatting

Chris: We've had a couple of discussions during the monthly calls,
.... in Jan, Aug, and TPAC during the MEIG meeting, breakout, and TTWG as well.
.... Building momentum over last few months, there's now a CG.
.... The people involved have been quite active, there are two main documents,
.... a use case description, which was presented during the MEIG call,
.... and API proposal looking at implementation considerations.
.... In conversation with people involved, we thought it would be worthwhile for the gap analysis and exploratory discussion to be done within the MEIG..
.... We can create a sub-group as a M&E IG Task Force.
.... Want to get to a clearer description/understanding about what is needed..
.... Three main questions: Is a new data interchange format, e.g., TTML/WebVTT, or extensions to those formats?
.... Do we need a client/server API for delivering the bullet chatting content?
.... And for presentation, what web APIs or changes to HTML are needed for rendering and layout?
.... We propose a short-term activity through the TF,
.... and then further spec development by the Bullet Chatting CG.
.... Here within the MEIG we could do discussion for gap analysis by broader participation, to help with the gap analysis.

Song: I can give a status update, then try to answer those questions.
.... Bullet chatting refers to comments that float over a video at a specific time point in the video,
.... it can bring a very interesting experience for viewers.
.... Bullet chatting is very popular with video services like Niconico, from DWANGO, who are in the CG and will contribute to the TF.
.... In China, there is Bilibili and AcFun, who are also CG members,
.... and others such as TenCent also provide this service.
.... That's the reason to standardise the technology and make it easy for developers across Asia and elsewhere.
.... After TPAC 2019, we created the Bullet Chatting CG, where we're working on the use cases and APIs.
.... Chris, etc., also joined the first telco of the CG. We gave a demo at TPAC in September.
.... During the call in November, we discussed a plan for standardisation.
.... We plan to start with use case clarification, then generate requirements, and find the gaps in existing standards such as from TTWG and other APIs, as well as data formats and protocols.
.... One thing we may want to standardise is CSS Animations with synchronization, and another is a data format and client/server API.
.... And now we're planning to create a TF within the MEIG as we thing this is the place where companies can exchange ideas beween content providers, distributors, and device manufacturers.
.... There are several devices manufacturers in the CG to work on this topic.. The goal for the TF is to make bullet chatting easier to implement,
.... and to apply it to broader applications. Chris described mission for the TF.
.... For the specific questions, feedback from our last meeting was that a data format could be useful for more use cases, for things not supported in HTML yet.
.... Regarding a new API, we discussed applying an animation to a media timeline, which could be useful.
.... Regarding rendering and animations, we're collecting use cases, e.g., 360 video and games. We think a solution like CSS animation with synchronisation can work.
.... That's as what I can say at the moment.

Chris: Any thoughts?

Kaz: We've generated some initial Charter for the expected TF, right?

Chris: Yes, there is also an issue on GitHub as well, a CfC. Can we take the resolution today to work on this?
.... Then we can set up a wiki page for the TF.
.... Anybody has any objection?

(none)

<scribe> ACTION: The MEIG would create a TF for the bullet chatting discussion.

Chris: I want to avoid confusion betwee the TF work and the CG.
.... I propose we use the existing CG repositories to capture the TF outputs, and contribute to the existing documents, to keep everything in one place..
.... The MEIG will do the gap analysis, and the CG can develop the APIs, which the MEIG is not chartered to do.
.... Song, what are the next steps?

Song: We'd like colleagues from TTWG to join a TF call,
.... There is some overlap already identified between the TTWG specs and bullet chatting, but some capababilities may not be supported yet.

Pierre: TTWG has focused interchange formats, not APIs.
.... So it's critical to answer the question whether an interchange format is needed. If not, there'd be reduced involvement from TTWG.

Song: We have a draft exchange format, but it's not been defined as a standard format yet.

Pierre: Is that a priority?

Song: It's not the top priority yet, as we still need to clarify gaps.

Pierre: So the top priority is an API?

Song: Yes

Chris: TTWG input to help clarify the gaps around interchange formats would be great.

Pierre: If we know we need an interchanging format, TTWG would be the right place, so could just do the work there.
.... But we'd need to know that from the Bullet chatting proponents, it's more of a use case question.

<nigel> +1

Chris: We may still need some exploratory work to answer that.

Nigel: I agree with Pierre's comments.
.... If the priority is to do an API first, then working out how to serialize the data needed for that is much easier after you have an API that works.
.... It could make sense to ensure the requirements are captured in the API, then work out how to serialize that, then you have something concrete for a gap analysis.
.... Doing both at the same time may not be such a good idea, as there is a risk of duplicating the requirements capture and getting different results, particularly if there's different groups of people.

Pierre: I would like to hear from the proponents of bullet chatting whether they think a data interchange format is needed. It's a critical question, and MEIG can help answer it.

Chris: Right, but not necessarily to answer right now.

Pierre: Definitely

Chris: That can be the first item for the TF to discuss, and that sets the direction for the next stage.
.... I propose to schedule a call to do that, will follow up with Song about that.

# Media production use cases

Pierre: At TPAC we had discussion on media production use cases.
.... It looked like there were a couple of people interested in the topic, or had prepared similar input to the IG.
.... Garrett started working on a gap document.
.... What's the best approach for this topic for 2020?
.... I'll summarise the background and problem statement. Just my perpective for now, but should be a group excercise so open for input.
.... [Background]
.... Professional media assets are increasingly being stored in the cloud rather than on-premises servers.
.... Once content is in the cloud, the next step is to build web applications around those assets, to author, manipulate, quality check, etc.
.... The web platform has made great progress in the last 10 years for media playback, professional authoring applications require additional capabilities.
.... They may be incremental capabilities, precise synchronization, support for HDR and wide gamut color images, higher fidelity timed text, etc.
.... [Problem statement]
.... What limitations of the web platform prevent the development of professional media apps, and how should these limitations be addressed?
.... Any comments?

Garrett: I think this is a good idea, collecting the use cases and gaps would be valuable. We as media producers have seen the gaps, but I expect there are others we've not thought of.
.... Collecting the use cases and seeking input from publishers would show it's a problem. It's a valuable thing for use to have.

Pierre: any other input?

Barbara: One approach is fixing existing problems that have been there for a long time,
.... another is looking at emerging areas, e.g., streaming and editing live sports.
.... A high level question is whether you want to tackle existing stable usages, or new and emerging use case?

Pierre: I would say all :)

Nigel: I think there is a clear need. Implementers tell me there are problems that they solve in some locally constrained way, but it's not clear what those problems are.
.... I would like us to gather information about the problems
.... which make media production web applications difficult to implement.

Chris: I agree with Nigel, but want to add that the frame accurate seeking issue in GitHub,
.... which talks about seeking and rendering aspects,
.... generated a lot of interest. Not only from IG members but the wider community, more than any other topic we've covered.
.... So I think there is something here to follow up.
.... [Media production use cases: Plans for 2020]
.... https://github.com/w3c/media-and-entertainment/issues/4 GitHub issue (issue 4)

Pierre: It's not clear to me what all the gaps are,
.... maybe more importantly whether we have critical mass within the MEIG, e..g., producers and people who develop professional media applications.
.... How to proceed? We'd want to poll external parties to draw a clearer picture.
.... We could invite input via GitHub, but not sure this is productive for that community.
.... Another option is maybe organizing a workshop, invite external people.
.... Simply organizing the workshop would provide useful information on who's interested and help refine the problem statement.
.... Does the concept of holding a workshop sounds interesting? Or other approaches?

<Barbara_H> Gaming did a workshop and it was effective

Garrett: It's valuable to put together a list of gaps, and holding a workshop would be good figure out what's missing.
.... How would you recommend we but get right people to attend?

Pierre: We have a lot of contacts, collectively. First step would be to define a scope for the workshop and each of us could informally talk to potential participants to gauge interest.

Chris: We've talked offline about a few ideas, whether it should be a virtual workshop or F2F.

Garrett: Possibly both so that people who can't participate in person can join the discussion.

Pierre: We could try, but it's hard in practice.

<Barbara_H> Target audience - Professional versus Casual?

Nigel: One option is to write some kind of public communication to let people know,
.... a W3C blog post that describes the problem area and invites input in a more public way that we could do something, of we have the right inputs.

Pierre: I like this idea. Does anyone think running a workshop is not a good idea?

(none)

<Barbara_H> Media is a pipeline - capture, production, distribution, consumption/rendering. Production is part of the pipeline

scribe: maybe the question to ask is whether the concept of having a workshop would be good or not

Chris: An alternative we talked about was to invite some specific people to share input during our monthly calls.
.... It wouldn't be as productive as a workshop.

Barbara: Thinking of media as a pipeline, production is part of that.
.... The open question is whether we've met the needs of the production audience.
.... You talk about professional production, but there's a growing area around amature production, e.g, for YouTube.
.... Question of whether to go for the high-end or the broader market.
.... I agree that we need to understand the needs of the audience.
.... Some companies may want to move to the web but there may be something holding them back.
.... As an example, one compamy we work with couldn't move to the web until new technologies like WASM came out.

Pierre: Professional vs non-professional is a good question, it's a grey area.

Chris: I like Nigel's suggestion, having something written down that we can share is a good approach.
.... Unless we have everything covered among existing IG members, in which case we could go ahead and do use case/gap analysis.
.... I also agree with Garrett's point that seeding it with some initial thoughts, so I think we should do both.

Pierre: Maybe we can combine that with our outreach messages, as a concrete example.

Chris: So the next step is to write something.

Garrett: Happy to contribute to that.

Kaz: I'm happy with this discussion, but before taking a resolution we should think about our needs, writing a concrete messages would be the next step.

# Web of Things

Kaz: There was some discussion at TPAC, we invited Chris to the WoT meeting to discuss possible collaboration between MEIG and WoT.
.... From a MEIG viewpoint, possible technical topics should include event handling and time synchronization,
.... and from a WoT viewpoint, TV as an edge device for IoT purposes and video streaming data.
.... It should proide a good collaborative discussion, so I propose a joint call. There's a Doodle poll. It seems the best slot would be Tuesday 4th Feb 2020.

https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/workshop/ws2/Presentations%20-%20Day%201/02%20-%20Overview.pdf W3C WoT Standardization Overview

Kaz: WoT's main purpose is interconnecting the IoT silos, e.g., CoAP or MQTT or HTTP based communication, lots of IoT standards and alliances.
.... We attempt to connect these using web standards, e.g., the WoT Thing Description. It's a simple JSON-LD based data model to be used as metadata for IoT purposes.
.... Devices advertise capabilities. We can talk about the details during the joint call in February.

Chris: We need some of the right people, including device manufacturers?

Kaz: Yes, also NHK have been working with WoT and have a Hybridcast based demo. We should include them.
.... If we hold the joint call on Feb. 4, we'll have many participants including NHK, Siemens, Fujitsu, Intel, etc.

Pierre: We could extend the IG call to cover the other topics as well, e.g., starting 30 mins earlier.

Chris: OK, so we cover other IG business as well.
.... Any final thoughts for today?

Rob: I'm particularly interested in the WoT idea, there's a crossover with WebVMT and the data sync aspect.
.... It's a proposal, but it's now in GitHub. I'm interested in hearing comments about that.

<RobSmith> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1141

Rob: There may be some common ground with bullet chatting too, in terms of the CSS animation, also thinking about for WebVMT.

Kaz: Interesting.

# Next IG call

Chris: Jan. 7th, will send out an agenda.
.... Thanks for joining!

[adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: The MEIG would create a TF for the bullet chatting discussion..

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2019/12/05 08:16:27 $
Received on Friday, 6 December 2019 15:44:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:57:45 UTC