Re: Agenda for Second Screen WG/CG F2F at TPAC

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:13 AM, François Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Mark,
>
> Le 19/09/2017 à 19:03, mark a. foltz a écrit :
>
>> Thank Anssi for setting this up.  I will take a pass at the agenda
>> shortly.
>>
>> One operational issue: the SSWG is chartered through October 31,
>> immediately before TPAC.
>>
>> That timeline seems too tight for Presentation API to go to REC; by 10/31
>> we would need a CfC to go to PR, then follow the PR process, which takes at
>> least 4 weeks if I remember correctly.  Ideally, we (Chrome) would also
>> appreciate extra time to address any issues found through implementation
>> testing (to improve the implementation report).  Also we may decide on a
>> set of features for the level 2 spec.
>>
>> For the Remote Playback API, we will need an additional window of time to
>> move it forward and address remaining issues (including interop, <video>
>> feature requirements, and soliciting a second implementation).
>>
>> We could ask for a one-month extension on the current charter (to cover
>> TPAC and REC track work on Presentation API v1), then discuss at TPAC the
>> time frame for a revised charter (once we know the amount of work that
>> would be in scope). >
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
> Do we have any visibility about potential changes of scope that we might
> want to put into the new charter?
>

If you look at the existing list of 'v2' features for the Presentation API
as well as the 'future' item for the Remote Playback API, they fall under
the scope of the current charter, so I think we're good there.

For instance, could any part of the on-going discussions on the Open Screen
> Protocol be ready for standardization by end of year and be worth including
> in scope of the Second Screen WG?
>

Based on some basic criteria, I would say "no" right now.

1. Have we reached consensus on basic technical issues?  Discovery,
transport and security consensus remains outstanding. Hopefully at TPAC we
can resolve these.
2. Do we have some implementation experience to give us confidence in the
solution?  Not yet - if Chrome continues to invest, and technical consensus
is achieved, then we would be looking at 1H 2018 to begin an implementation
effort.
3. Is Open Screen mature enough for wide review and scrutiny?  When #1 and
#2 are achieved, then I think we will be ready.

Also, my default position is that the IETF is the right place to move the
Open Screen work to the standards track, which would not impact the
chartering process for the WG.

If we know already that this work should rather remain in incubation for
> now, or should rather be standardized elsewhere, then we may want to ask
> for a one-year charter extension directly with limited or no change in
> scope to:
>
> 1. push the Presentation API to Recommendation, adjusting the test suite
> and the implementation report as needed;
> 2. start develop the Presentation API level 2 specification;
> 3. complete the test suite of the Remote Playback API and solicit a second
> implementation.
>
> If there are good chances that we'll want to adjust the scope of the
> charter, then now is a good time to start the discussion, and we can indeed
> ask for a short 1-2 month charter extension in the meantime.
>

There may be new work that comes out of TPAC and/or collaboration with the
Web & TV IG;  it would likely start as incubation in the WICG or Webscreens
CG though.

Overall, I endorse Francois' plan suggested above.  If there is a need to
discuss scope further (above and beyond email) I'm happy to dial into a
teleconference prior to TPAC.

m.

Francois.
>
> m.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:43 AM, Kostiainen, Anssi <
>> anssi.kostiainen@intel.com <mailto:anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Second Screen WG/CG,
>>         Mark, Mounir, Chris,
>>
>>      > On 14 Sep 2017, at 16.49, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org
>>     <mailto:fd@w3.org>> wrote:
>>      >
>>      > Hello Second Screen WG participants,
>>      >
>>      > Our next F2F will take place during TPAC in Burlingame,
>>     California. Please remember to register for the meeting at:
>>      > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2017/
>>     <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2017/>
>>      >
>>      > Other events seem to be taking place around that area during the
>>     same week, so note flights and hotels are filling up fast!
>>
>>     Now that you all have hopefully registered, it is a good time to
>>     look at the F2F agenda.
>>
>>     I put up proposed F2F topics to the wiki to start the discussion:
>>
>>     https://www.w3.org/wiki/Second_Screen/Meetings/Nov_2017_F2F#Agenda
>>     <https://www.w3.org/wiki/Second_Screen/Meetings/Nov_2017_F2F#Agenda>
>>
>>     (on mobile, click the topic to expand)
>>
>>     Mark - given the Presentation API has had only minor revisions
>>     lately, I'd expect most of the F2F time spent on the Open Screen
>>     Protocol topics. Feel free to suggest more concrete breakdown of
>>     topics for the protocol-level discussions.
>>
>>     Mounir, Mark - any topics you'd like to cover for the Remote
>>     Playback API in particular? My expectation is we're able to publish
>>     the CR before TPAC and as such should discuss the CR feedback
>>     received prior to TPAC. The current open issues do not seem to
>>     require too much discussion beyond #41 that is pending
>>     implementation experience.
>>
>>     Chris - does the proposed joint session with the Media and
>>     Entertainment IG on Monday afternoon still work for your group? I'd
>>     suggest we meet right after lunch, say 2-3pm on Monday. OK?
>>
>>     All - please let us know any topics you'd like to see discussed at
>>     the F2F that may have been missed. If you haven't yet registered but
>>     would like to attend, please do so by 6 October 2017. You can make
>>     edits directly to the wiki or simply reply to this mail with your
>>     suggestions.
>>
>>     Looking forward to another productive Second Screen F2F at TPAC 2017!
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>
>>     -Anssi (Second Screen WG Chair)
>>
>>
>>