IRC log of mediafrag on 2008-12-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:41:09 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #mediafrag
07:41:09 [RRSAgent]
logging to
07:41:11 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
07:41:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #mediafrag
07:41:13 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be IA_MFWG
07:41:13 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
07:41:14 [trackbot]
Meeting: Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
07:41:14 [trackbot]
Date: 09 December 2008
07:42:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
07:43:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
07:43:50 [raphael]
Chair: Erik, Raphael
07:43:54 [Zakim]
ok, Yves; conference Team_(mediafrag)07:43Z scheduled with code 26631 (CONF1) for 600 minutes until 1743Z
07:51:07 [fd]
fd has joined #mediafrag
07:55:34 [raphael]
Present: Yves, Erik, Raphael, Tom, Davy, Frank (canon observer)
07:55:59 [raphael]
Present+: Silvia (irc)
07:56:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
07:57:26 [raphael]
07:57:45 [raphael]
scribenick: raphael
07:58:36 [erik]
erik has joined #mediafrag
08:16:08 [raphael]
TOPIC: 1. Admin
08:17:06 [raphael]
I would like we talk about the composition of the group in order to know if more people/companies are about to join
08:19:02 [raphael]
YouTube/Google Video: Ken Harrenstien is more interested in Media Annotations
08:19:31 [raphael]
... it would be interested to have someone that has implemented fragments access
08:19:51 [raphael]
Action: Yves to find out with Philippe who from Google would be interested to join
08:19:51 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-17 - Find out with Philippe who from Google would be interested to join [on Yves Lafon - due 2008-12-16].
08:20:56 [raphael]
Action: Raphael to see with Marie Claire who from Daily Motion can join
08:20:56 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Raphael
08:22:46 [Yves]
ACTION-2 on Troncy
08:23:11 [Yves]
ACTION-2 due December 16 2008
08:23:11 [trackbot]
ACTION-2 Set up a questionary for seond MediaFrag F2F in Gent (8. and 9. Dec) due date now December 16 2008
08:23:15 [raphael]
Frank (Canon): it would be difficult for Canon to join in 2009
08:26:44 [raphael]
Adobe: Larry Masinter answered, he has not yet someone to nominate in the group, but Adobe supports strongly this group
08:27:48 [raphael]
Action: Troncy to check with Karen about Blinx joining or not W3C and Colm the WG
08:27:48 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-19 - Check with Karen about Blinx joining or not W3C and Colm the WG [on Rapha√ęl Troncy - due 2008-12-16].
08:29:17 [davy]
davy has joined #mediafrag
08:29:32 [raphael]
Action: Michael to check with Wolfgang whether he is still interested in this WG
08:29:32 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-20 - Check with Wolfgang whether he is still interested in this WG [on Michael Hausenblas - due 2008-12-16].
08:29:59 [nessy]
I'm idling
08:30:19 [nessy]
will have go for 2 hours, but back then
08:32:11 [raphael]
Action: Erik to check with Philippe the status of Cisco (Paul Bosso), Apple (Dave Singer or Eric Carlson)
08:32:11 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-21 - Check with Philippe the status of Cisco (Paul Bosso), Apple (Dave Singer or Eric Carlson) [on Erik Mannens - due 2008-12-16].
08:33:01 [raphael]
Action: Raphael to check with Karen the status of Fox Interactive, if they could have an interest in the group
08:33:01 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Raphael
08:33:45 [Yves]
ACTION: RaphaŽl to check with Karen the status of Fox Interactive, if they could have an interest in the group
08:33:45 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - RaphaŽl
08:34:33 [raphael]
Erik: should we have a stronger liaison with HTML5?
08:35:25 [raphael]
Yves: we have work to do, it is good to keep contact, but we could ask more feedback when we have better documents
08:35:35 [raphael]
... same for browser vendors
08:36:18 [raphael]
Topic: 2. Discussion Existing Technologies
08:37:42 [raphael]
On the wiki:
08:41:02 [raphael]
Tom (IBBT) going through the wiki
08:41:33 [raphael]
Presentation also available at:
08:42:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
08:43:38 [raphael]
Tom: first explain what SMIL can do (Jack will be here later today and tomorrow)
08:44:42 [raphael]
... MPEG-7 (see slide 3)
08:47:19 [raphael]
Raphael: should we discuss the format for representing the time point?
08:47:34 [raphael]
Yves: you can adopt the ISO Dates one, the XML Schema one
08:47:56 [raphael]
... the MPEG-7 one is based on XML Schema, minus the Time Zone, but adding the frame number
08:48:38 [Yves]
08:51:28 [raphael]
08:51:49 [raphael]
Yves: we should say we consider only time that is local to the media
08:52:04 [raphael]
... so de don't care about time zones for example
08:52:55 [raphael]
Tom: SVG has no temporal fragment
08:54:09 [raphael]
... TimedText: it shows text at a given time
08:58:10 [fd]
fd has joined #mediafrag
08:58:20 [raphael]
... seems to have another format for representing time point
08:59:09 [raphael]
Tom: CMML derives from Annodex, it requires an off file that has been annotated
09:01:08 [raphael]
Yves: Silvia points the problem of accessing a given frame, if it is not an I-Fram
09:01:22 [Yves]
(when referencing only time)
09:01:35 [raphael]
Raphael: we can decide to always go to the previous I-Frame, that precedes a time point
09:02:38 [raphael]
Tom: CMML specifies time with npt, smpte and clock
09:02:46 [raphael]
Raphael: should we do the same?
09:04:19 [raphael]
Tom: default seems to be npt
09:05:52 [raphael]
Raphael: we come back to these questions when Sivlia is on the phone
09:06:43 [raphael]
Tom: CMML/Annodex/TemporalURI has no spatial Fragment
09:06:53 [raphael]
... can select Tracks (such as in a CD)
09:07:45 [raphael]
... has the notion of naming a fragment and refer to this name
09:09:39 [raphael]
Yves: is there an error in the named fragment example? Should the '/' be escaped for selecting the tracks 'a' and 'b' N
09:09:44 [raphael]
09:09:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
09:12:26 [raphael]
Tom: MPEG-21 has 4 different schemes (ffp, offset, mp, mask)
09:12:54 [raphael]
... offset works in bytes range
09:15:03 [raphael]
... mp scheme has the time dimension (npt, smpte, utc, mpeg-7) and the spatial dimension (polygon, rectangle, elipse)
09:15:40 [raphael]
... mask is similar to kind of naming a fragment
09:17:17 [raphael]
Tom: HTML5 (see slide 5)
09:17:38 [raphael]
... no support for fragmentation or time reference (like in SVG)
09:18:57 [raphael]
... has Time Daatatypes: Date, Time, Date and Time, Time Zones (UTC: add a Z at the end; others: add time difference to UTC with + or -)
09:19:48 [raphael]
... values come from XML Schema (perhaps with one small difference, since the seconds can be omitted)
09:25:04 [erik]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:25:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate erik
09:27:07 [raphael]
raphael has joined #mediafrag
09:27:20 [raphael]
Raphael: go through the spatial fragments specifications (image maps, MPEG-7, SVG)
09:28:55 [raphael]
Erik: how this technological survey be used ?
09:29:18 [raphael]
Raphael: we will provide either informally or in the spec a mapping between the URI schem and these various XML syntaxes
09:29:43 [raphael]
Yves: Since we want a URI scheme, we will not support everything we have seen, but the maximal possible subset
09:33:29 [davy]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:33:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate davy
09:34:08 [rtroncy]
rtroncy has joined #mediafrag
09:35:37 [erik]
erik has joined #mediafrag
09:35:59 [tom]
tom has joined #mediafrag
10:09:02 [fd]
fd has joined #mediafrag
10:17:05 [nessy]
back now
10:18:31 [rtroncy]
Silvia, we have a number of questions for you :-)
10:19:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
10:19:55 [Zakim]
Team_(mediafrag)07:43Z has now started
10:19:56 [Zakim]
+ +0329331aaaa
10:20:00 [raphael]
Question 1: We reviewed
10:20:11 [raphael]
zakim, aaaa is Meeting_Room
10:20:11 [Zakim]
+Meeting_Room; got it
10:20:56 [raphael]
... we wonder if there is not a mistake in the URI example, and if the '/' should not be escaped
10:24:42 [Zakim]
+ +61.2.801.2.aabb
10:24:42 [Zakim]
- +61.2.801.2.aabb
10:24:44 [Zakim]
+ +61.2.801.2.aabb
10:26:15 [raphael]
Silvia: first we use a '-' and then move to '/'
10:26:56 [Yves]
in the examples on CMML, the / after the ? should be escaped
10:27:13 [Yves]
=> %2f
10:28:50 [raphael]
Silvia: I think it is ok to have the '/' in the fragment ('#') but not for the query ('?')
10:29:38 [raphael]
Silvia will check whether there is a syntax error or not
10:30:22 [raphael]
Question 2: CMML covered 3 schemes for representing time point: npt, smpte and clock
10:30:37 [raphael]
Raphael: should we do the same?
10:30:59 [raphael]
Silvia: we wanted to be interoperable with all formats
10:31:14 [raphael]
... in practice, people tend to use the 'npt' scheme
10:31:30 [raphael]
... maybe it is better to talk with video professionals
10:31:37 [raphael]
... they need to access the frame level
10:31:58 [raphael]
... I think that for most use cases, the npt scheme is accurate enough
10:33:13 [raphael]
... npt is the default scheme in CMML
10:34:08 [raphael]
... don't confuse: ntp, the network time protocol (unix) and npt, what we are discussing
10:34:57 [raphael]
... npt = normal playback time
10:35:34 [raphael]
Raphael: Question 3: Frame access, should we always go to the last I-Frame that precedes the time point we want to access
10:35:41 [raphael]
Silvia: depends on the what the codecs allows
10:36:05 [raphael]
... with Theora, we jump to always to the previous I-Frame
10:36:55 [raphael]
... we need to be accurate when we store the fragment (cache), it seems less important on the client side
10:37:35 [raphael]
Davy: I agree with Silvia, we might want to provide some guidelines for some specific formats
10:38:10 [raphael]
... we cannot define an algorithm that says that a time point corresponds to a particual frame for all encoding cases, it's not possible
10:38:28 [raphael]
Silvia: we can say that previous I-Frame is accurate enough
10:39:52 [raphael]
Raphael: what the cache will finally store?
10:40:29 [raphael]
Silvia: Cache will store what the servers is serving, and recompose fragments based on bytes, not using the URI requested by the UA
10:40:40 [davy]
10:41:46 [raphael]
Topic: 3. Define Types of Addressing
10:41:51 [Silvia]
zakim: mute me
10:42:08 [raphael]
10:42:56 [Silvia]
zakim, mute me
10:42:56 [Zakim]
Silvia should now be muted
10:43:04 [raphael]
Erik: page prepared by Davy (with Guillaume input?)
10:43:52 [raphael]
Davy: this page has origin from the list of issues we have discussed during our 1st face to face meeting
10:44:36 [raphael]
... Track: whether a media format supports tracks or not depends on the Container format, but not the Coding format
10:45:36 [raphael]
Frank: do you consider all the video quality level in one track? for example in a media adaptation use case
10:46:11 [raphael]
Davy: I do not think that a different quality of the video is a fragment
10:49:52 [raphael]
Raphael: discussion about what is the boudaries of the track definition
10:50:06 [Silvia]
zakim, unmute me
10:50:06 [Zakim]
Silvia should no longer be muted
10:51:58 [raphael]
Yves: examples such as multiple camera angles, multiple resolution of the same video in the same stream, audio languages, subtitles: are all of these tracks ?
10:52:46 [raphael]
Silvia: the boundary should be what the encoding format exposes
10:53:07 [raphael]
... or rather the container format
10:53:25 [Silvia]
10:53:56 [raphael]
Raphael: if the container format exposes the notion of tracks, we could address them, otherwise, we should NOT invent them
10:54:29 [raphael]
... we look at the table
10:54:44 [raphael]
Silvia: different camera angles can be seen as multiple video tracks
10:55:16 [raphael]
... different resolution: encoding format does not work that way, they tend to provide different files
10:55:26 [raphael]
... we should not worry about that now, can be dealt with later
10:56:42 [raphael]
Davy: Temporal dimension: need to take into account the precision we can get in the time point
10:58:26 [raphael]
... Spatial dimension: we cannot generally extract a region, not make yet a decision if we consider only rectangle regions or arbitrary shapes
10:58:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
10:59:47 [raphael]
... Name dimension: again depends on the container format! For example, one can include a CMML or TimedText description in a MP4 or Ogg container
11:01:06 [raphael]
Silvia: QuickTime has 'QuickTimeText' that can be used to jump to a dvd chapter
11:01:31 [Silvia]
11:01:39 [raphael]
... Flash has cueranges
11:01:55 [Silvia]
11:02:22 [Silvia]
ups, s/cueranges/cuepoints/
11:02:28 [raphael]
Yves: ?
11:03:26 [raphael]
Davy: the table is not complete yet, for some format, I couldn't figure out what is possible or not
11:05:12 [raphael]
Davy: summary is that generally, the temporal dimension is not a problem
11:05:35 [raphael]
... for the spatial dimension, this is more problematic!
11:06:01 [raphael]
... a ROI can be extracted with H264, but this is not a crop, rather a decrease in quality
11:06:33 [raphael]
... but generally not possible to extract a region in the compressed domain
11:08:34 [raphael]
Raphael: it is not clear what to do with a spatial fragment
11:08:58 [raphael]
... my suggestion would be that the server send the whole picture, but the UA does something with the fragment, e.g. highlight the region
11:09:22 [raphael]
Davy: for a mobile use case, it makes more sense to not download the whole image, but just the region
11:09:53 [raphael]
Frank: why not specifying that in the URI, whether the client want to download the complete resource or not
11:10:31 [raphael]
Yves: can be done in HTTP with an extension
11:11:21 [raphael]
... the discovery phase will be: server, tell me what do you support
11:11:56 [raphael]
... for example, using the option method, or some parameters in the GET, there are many options
11:12:48 [raphael]
... we can then implement the option response, or a content negociation
11:12:50 [Yves]
11:13:23 [raphael]
Yves: discovery is always painful!
11:15:08 [raphael]
Silvia: we always found that discovery was difficult
11:15:28 [raphael]
... we had to find out which tracks were available
11:15:32 [Silvia]
11:15:50 [raphael]
... we discussed a format, named ROE, which is a media file format description
11:17:28 [raphael]
... this is currently used in Metavid
11:19:19 [raphael]
Silvia: I'm not sure how the discovery and selection should be handled by URI or not
11:20:55 [raphael]
Silvia: the UA asks for the ROE file, parse the XML and knows which tracks are available, the UA can then request the right track
11:21:36 [Silvia]
e.g. ?track=a1,v1,sub1,cap1
11:23:05 [raphael]
Raphael: can we find the track description in some headers of the container format?
11:23:13 [raphael]
Davy: it depends on the format, it might be the case
11:23:28 [raphael]
Sivlia: I agree, it didn't exist for ogg, that's why we invented ROE
11:26:21 [raphael]
... I'm in favor of specifying a syntax, even though just one format will be able to deal with it
11:26:49 [raphael]
... so have a way of specifying tracks and we will list later on which codec and container formats can process
11:26:59 [Silvia]
11:28:06 [raphael]
11:28:47 [raphael]
Davy: the audio encoding formats are just relevant for the temporal dimension
11:29:04 [raphael]
... the still images format: JPEG2000 is pretty advanced
11:30:01 [raphael]
... the container formats: mov, mp4, 3gp allows to select track and names, but we need to modify some values (for example change the length field)
11:30:22 [raphael]
... for other formats such as MXG, ASF, I put question marks
11:32:34 [raphael]
Action: Davy to complete the table, trying to get the answer for the current question marks, except when this is a close format
11:32:34 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-22 - Complete the table, trying to get the answer for the current question marks, except when this is a close format [on Davy Van Deursen - due 2008-12-16].
11:33:44 [raphael]
Davy: some formats are then useless for our purpose, because they will support nothing (e.g. WAV, AIFF, AU, XMF)
11:34:02 [raphael]
Raphael: it is still interested to report this information in the document
11:38:08 [raphael]
Raphael: Summary: we agree to cover these 4 dimensions
11:38:39 [raphael]
... perhaps the syntax will be simpler for the temporal dimension, since it will be 99% of our use cases
11:39:04 [raphael]
... perhaps the temporal dimension will be the default one
11:39:09 [Zakim]
11:39:28 [Zakim]
11:39:29 [Zakim]
Team_(mediafrag)07:43Z has ended
11:39:30 [Zakim]
Attendees were +0329331aaaa, Tom, Raphael, Erik, Davy, Frank, Yves, +61.2.801.2.aabb, Silvia
11:39:40 [raphael]
... up to decide to the WG when we will talk about the syntax
11:39:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
11:40:37 [raphael]
12:41:08 [Zakim]
irc bot restart in 3 minutes to reset state; if this will be too much of an inconvenience, comment on #sysreq know
12:44:32 [raphael]
Silvia, quick poll
12:44:56 [Silvia]
12:45:01 [raphael]
Media Annotations is willing to organize the next joint face to face meeting in Barcelona
12:45:10 [raphael]
prior to the WWW conference in Madrid
12:45:21 [Silvia]
awww - I'd love to go there!
12:45:25 [raphael]
potential dates are: 16 and 17 of April
12:45:36 [raphael]
WWW conference will then be 20-24 of April
12:45:51 [raphael]
so you have to spend the week-end in Barcelona and/or Madrid
12:46:00 [raphael]
... we can also go to the beach :-)
12:46:06 [raphael]
will you be able to make it ?
12:46:24 [Silvia]
12:46:41 [Silvia]
will need to see from the biz POV and whether I can get Mozilla to sponsor it
12:46:46 [raphael]
depends on your funding ? Mozilla?
12:46:49 [Silvia]
(or some of it)
12:46:54 [raphael]
12:46:59 [raphael]
good, but I note your interest
12:47:34 [raphael]
Topic: 3. Implementation Issues (protocol & caching)
12:47:35 [Silvia]
when you're in australia, meeting people in your field is of major interest, since everybody is so far away
12:48:31 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #mediafrag
12:48:52 [raphael]
Yves leads the dicussion
12:50:54 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #mediafrag
12:52:07 [Zakim]
Team_(mediafrag)07:43Z has now started
12:52:15 [Zakim]
+ +329331aaaa
12:52:28 [raphael]
zakim, aaaa is Meeting_Room
12:52:28 [Zakim]
+Meeting_Room; got it
12:52:54 [raphael]
Present: Yves, Frank, Davy, Erik, Raphael, Tom, Silvia (remote)
12:53:15 [raphael]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
12:53:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
12:53:40 [Zakim]
+ +61.2.801.2.aabb
12:54:17 [raphael]
s/3. Implementation Issues/4. Implementation Issues
12:55:35 [raphael]
Yves: look at
12:56:06 [raphael]
... there is a discussion in the mailing list between myself, Silvia and others
12:56:22 [raphael]
... about the solutions recommended by annodex, the 4-way handshakes
12:56:34 [raphael]
... and I was discussing the alternative 2-way handshakes
12:57:16 [raphael]
... both are limited, because it will be difficult to access track fragments, and even worst spatial fragments, because transcoding might be required
12:57:55 [raphael]
Silvia: we should not use fragment when a transcoding operation is needed
12:58:23 [raphael]
Yves: when you deal with tracks, do you think we can handle everything in the compressed domains?
12:58:38 [raphael]
Silvia: yes, tracks are dealt with by the container formats
12:59:56 [raphael]
Davy: yes it depends on the format
13:00:35 [raphael]
... why do you think the outcome of a transcoding operation is not a fragment anymore ?
13:01:22 [raphael]
Silvia: because there is no one to one mapping between the bytes of the original file and the outcome file
13:01:51 [raphael]
... i'm talking about physical fragment and not logical fragment
13:02:17 [raphael]
Yves: I argue that a fragment in the URI spec does not specify if it is a compressed resource
13:02:33 [raphael]
... it is a part of the resource
13:03:17 [raphael]
Silvia: I argue that a fragment of a original resource must be a part of the resource
13:03:23 [raphael]
Yves: I do not argue
13:03:57 [raphael]
... you can have lostless transformation process, but there is not a single byte range process
13:04:15 [raphael]
Silvia: I didn't argue about having a single or multiple byte ranges
13:04:23 [raphael]
Yves and Davy disagree
13:04:45 [raphael]
Yves: if you transcode to a different format, yes, this is a different resource
13:05:05 [raphael]
... but if you transcode to the same format, I would consider this is the same resource
13:05:10 [raphael]
... so a valid fragment
13:06:18 [raphael]
Yves: example, get all <H1> in a HTML page, this is a fragment
13:06:42 [raphael]
... it might not be a continous fragment, so difficult to cache, but it is still a fragment
13:07:09 [raphael]
Silvia: YES, but you're not changing the bytes, you have the same bytes
13:07:48 [raphael]
Yves: ok, but if you use FLAC, which is lostless, you will have a valid fragment
13:08:08 [raphael]
... mp3 is definitively not the same thing
13:08:19 [raphael]
... the fact that the stored bytes are different is not relevant
13:08:32 [raphael]
... the criteria is what you get, what you watch
13:09:02 [raphael]
Raphael: ok, but cache will handle that?
13:09:17 [raphael]
s/cache/how cache
13:09:38 [raphael]
Yves: caches are not forced to store _all_ fragments, need to be specified
13:11:15 [raphael]
Yves: merging does not involve a simple concatenation of bytes ... you already add information for serving the fragments
13:11:53 [raphael]
Silvia: I think we will have a lot of pitfalls with this path
13:12:03 [raphael]
Yves: which ones ? I want to see examples
13:12:46 [raphael]
Silvia: take samples of a FLAC file, decode them, and re-encode them, you will not get a playable piece ???
13:13:26 [raphael]
... I just do not see happening this extra complexity
13:13:34 [raphael]
Yves: perhaps, but nothing prevent to do that?
13:13:54 [raphael]
... i'm arguing that such operation done in the cache might be more efficient
13:14:21 [raphael]
Silvia: i don't want to support transoding with lost of information
13:14:49 [raphael]
Yves: agree, fair thing to do
13:14:59 [erik]
13:15:04 [raphael]
... but not all merging operation have to be done with transcoding
13:15:41 [raphael]
Raphael: which formats are we talking about ?
13:16:04 [raphael]
Davy: most of them that are used loose information anyway
13:16:34 [raphael]
Yves: if you do a lossy transformation, then you will get another resource, so another URI
13:18:23 [raphael]
... but it can be done transparently using content negotiation
13:19:03 [raphael]
Yves: another issue, is that annodex create an unlimited numbers of sub-resources
13:19:16 [raphael]
... because it uses the ? and not a real fragment
13:19:53 [raphael]
Silvia: we did that because we thought it was not appropriate to use the '#' ... but I'm happy to use now the hash
13:20:48 [raphael]
Yves: i just want to come to the header (and footer) of the current annodex solution ... that is done in the compressed domain
13:23:35 [raphael]
... the solution I'm talking about has headers modified
13:24:12 [raphael]
... smart caches will have a way of doing merge in the compressed domains
13:24:19 [raphael]
13:24:39 [raphael]
... it can be done in specialized proxies (dedicated to media)
13:25:53 [Silvia]
in Ogg, it is not possible to have a video file with a gap at the beginning and a gap and a gap in the middle
13:26:01 [Silvia]
it will not result in a valid resource
13:26:12 [Silvia]
thus, if you have more than one segment, it needs to be done as video playlists
13:35:10 [raphael]
Silvia: the solution we advocated in Annodex will not store n times the overlap
13:35:11 [raphael]
13:36:14 [raphael]
Yves: in my solution, we will store just the complete playable files
13:36:57 [raphael]
... so we are talking about the same thing, except that in my case, we store additional headers and footers
13:38:41 [kfish]
kfish has joined #mediafrag
13:42:28 [raphael]
Hi Conrad ...
13:42:47 [conrad]
hi raphael :-)
13:43:39 [raphael]
Conclusion: Yves advocates to store and cache what the server is serving, playable resources, so the bytes corresponding to the fragment requested anhanced with the apropriate header/footer depending on the encoding format
13:43:55 [raphael]
13:44:02 [raphael]
13:44:20 [raphael]
13:44:38 [raphael]
Yves: same as byte ranges, if there is overlap, the cache will merge them
13:45:09 [raphael]
... we are talking about smart caches ... the other ones will not cache them
13:46:21 [raphael]
Silvia: I will favor we go mainly for byte ranges and see immediate implementations
13:46:29 [raphael]
... and see later what can be improved
13:48:23 [raphael]
Yves: if you want to do only byte ranges, you should do it such a way that it is still a fragment
13:48:43 [raphael]
... the solution was advocating does that naturally, but requires smart caches
13:48:59 [raphael]
s/was/I was
13:50:15 [Silvia]
The byte range based proposal for caching web proxies in annodex is one that can be supported by existing web proxies
13:50:30 [Silvia]
therefore I suggest we support that first
13:51:06 [Silvia]
the difference between this and what Yves proposes is that the recomposition intelligence goes into the server or into the web proxy
13:51:08 [raphael]
Raphael: but does annodex solution implies storing additional information such as header/footer ?
13:51:30 [Silvia]
if Yves case, the web proxy has to know about all the encoding formats and needs to understand how to recompose them
13:51:48 [raphael]
Erik: I wonder if your two solutions are orthogonal or not?
13:52:08 [Silvia]
I was proposing to do both
13:52:19 [raphael]
Raphael: Silvia, YES, but Yves talked about smart dedicated web media proxies
13:52:21 [Silvia]
13:53:47 [raphael]
Yves: I agree with supporting both, but I would add we put too much emphasis on caching, given that most of the traffic is not cached anyway
13:53:58 [raphael]
... so we should not spend too much time on caches
13:55:05 [Silvia]
it's done through services like Akamai
13:55:27 [Yves]
who are not using HTTP caches for that (at least the CDN I know of)
13:55:54 [Zakim]
13:56:06 [Zakim]
13:56:08 [Zakim]
Team_(mediafrag)07:43Z has ended
13:56:09 [Zakim]
Attendees were +329331aaaa, Meeting_Room, +61.2.801.2.aabb, Silvia
13:56:12 [Silvia]
no, they are using proprietary solutions
13:56:24 [Silvia]
and thus avoiding the existing Web proxy infrastructure
13:56:46 [Silvia]
but that's outside of what we need to worry about :)
13:56:56 [Yves]
yes :)
13:57:05 [Silvia]
say hi to the media annotations guys :)
13:57:10 [Silvia]
I will continue to hang out here
13:59:17 [raphael]
Coffee break
13:59:29 [raphael]
Topic: 5. Joint Session with Media Annotations WG
13:59:39 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
14:41:54 [erik]
Topic: joint meeting MF & MA
14:42:12 [fsasaki]
fsasaki has joined #mediafrag
14:42:45 [Daniel]
Daniel has joined #mediafrag
14:43:01 [erik]
poll third F2F: 16/04-17/04 @ Barcelona (prior to WWW conference @ Madrid)
14:43:25 [erik]
everybody finds it a good idea
14:43:32 [wonsuk]
wonsuk has joined #mediafrag
14:45:31 [wernerbailer]
wernerbailer has joined #mediafrag
14:45:51 [erik]
Raphael to talk about status of MF group
14:45:56 [vmalais]
vmalais has joined #mediafrag
14:46:14 [erik]
14:47:00 [tobiasb]
tobiasb has joined #mediafrag
14:47:31 [erik]
first document will be UC + how technical solution should look like (a.o. protocol/caching issues)
14:47:39 [tom]
tom has joined #mediafrag
14:49:28 [erik]
Raphael summarizes wiki-pages under "Preparation of Working Draft"
14:49:34 [erik]
* Use Cases
14:51:18 [erik]
14:52:32 [erik]
... functional and non-functional requirements are also part of that UC page
14:53:07 [erik]
* Communication between client and server
14:53:39 [erik]
... (to be elaborated soon)
14:53:52 [erik]
... 2-way & 4-way handshake
14:54:08 [erik]
* Existing technologies
14:54:33 [erik]
14:55:31 [erik]
... cover all technologies out there & in the end convert our solution back to existing ones
14:55:55 [erik]
Question: what type of fragments will be possible?
14:56:12 [erik]
... temporal for sure in v1
14:56:56 [erik]
... temporal & spatial for video is most difficult one in v2
14:57:17 [erik]
... also tracks are in scope in v1
14:58:31 [erik]
ACTION: Erik (together with Jean-Pierre) to add TV-Anytime also to Existing Technologies Survey
14:58:31 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-23 - (together with Jean-Pierre) to add TV-Anytime also to Existing Technologies Survey [on Erik Mannens - due 2008-12-16].
15:00:46 [joakim]
joakim has joined #mediafrag
15:00:49 [erik]
ability of using XMP for notition of tracks ... this seems possible (link MF & MA) ... to be investigated
15:02:06 [raphael]
scribenick: erik
15:02:28 [erik]
... common scenario from MA (description of resources) to MF (communication client/server through content negotiation) for selecting tracks
15:03:01 [fsasaki]
15:03:15 [fsasaki]
15:06:16 [cpoppe]
cpoppe has joined #mediafrag
15:07:04 [erik]
ACTION: Erik (through extra info from Felix) to ask Adobe (Larry) more info about xmpMM:Ingredients
15:07:04 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-24 - (through extra info from Felix) to ask Adobe (Larry) more info about xmpMM:Ingredients [on Erik Mannens - due 2008-12-16].
15:08:17 [erik]
Felix to talk about status of MA group
15:11:26 [erik]
* stating problem of information loss when mapping (setting) information from one format to generic MA ontology
15:12:47 [erik]
... Raphael: is common subset on metalevel not enough?
15:13:31 [Sam]
Sam has joined #mediafrag
15:16:52 [erik]
... felix: looked at existing meta-models today ... all "getting" models, not "setting" ... issues (protocol, information loss)
15:18:59 [erik]
... Raphael: maybe MF can give some input via explanation of our table ... within ...
15:19:23 [erik]
15:20:37 [erik]
... summary: 5th column ... everywhere where there is a "1"&"2" it is possible to add metadata within
15:22:33 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #mediafrag
15:22:36 [fsasaki]
fsasaki has joined #mediafrag
15:23:30 [raphael]
Raphael: in case some metadata are embedded into the header of a media resource, should we be able to have access to it using a fragment ?
15:23:42 [raphael]
... using which dimension ? the 'name' dimension ?
15:24:57 [erik]
felix: will named fragments be possible?
15:25:35 [erik]
... Raphael: yes (i18 will be problem to handle though)
15:26:08 [erik]
* XMP overview
15:26:43 [erik]
15:29:36 [erik]
... Raphael: what about collisions of types/values?
15:30:44 [Daniel]
15:32:19 [erik]
... only get-functions for the moment (cfr. "setting"-problem)
15:35:23 [fsasaki]
15:42:12 [fsasaki]
15:42:26 [erik]
... UC document
15:49:48 [tom]
tom has joined #mediafrag
15:52:20 [erik]
formal review of MA UC Doc by MF (probably before 31/12/08)
15:53:10 [erik]
formal review of MF UC Doc by MA (and others SVG, HTML5, TimedText) (probably before 31/01/09)
15:56:40 [Daniel]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:56:40 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Daniel
15:58:19 [raphael]
15:58:23 [raphael]
thx the organizers
15:59:09 [cpoppe]
cpoppe has left #mediafrag
16:00:38 [vmalais]
16:00:58 [wonsuk]
wonsuk has left #mediafrag
16:02:36 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate fsasaki
16:09:12 [erik]
erik has joined #mediafrag
16:21:59 [erik]
erik has joined #mediafrag
16:25:48 [erik]
erik has joined #mediafrag