MAWG -- 08 Dec 2009

<tmichel> Hello everyone ...

<joakim> David are you on the phoen bridge aswell?

hi all, sorry I'm late

<joakim> scriber?

pchampi

<scribe> scribe: pchampin

yes

<joakim> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/admin.html

minutes approval

<joakim> http://www.w3.org/2009/12/01-mediaann-minutes.html

<joakim> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/open

Joakim: next week will be the last telecon before Xmas holiday

minutes approved

open action items

ACTION-154?

<trackbot> ACTION-154 -- Joakim Söderberg to ask dave about the relationship of digital data exchange with Apple stuff, ID3, iTunesXML, etc -- due 2009-09-15 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/154

Joakim: I had a discussion with Dave

close ACTION-154

<trackbot> ACTION-154 Ask dave about the relationship of digital data exchange with Apple stuff, ID3, iTunesXML, etc closed

ACTION-169?

<trackbot> ACTION-169 -- Véronique Malaisé to veronique to update text on in scope formats in ontology doc (formats not in mapping table) -- due 2009-11-12 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/169

close ACTION-169

<trackbot> ACTION-169 veronique to update text on in scope formats in ontology doc (formats not in mapping table) closed

ACTION-172?

<trackbot> ACTION-172 -- Véronique Malaisé to rewrite intro to be clear on what we mean by ontology -- due 2009-11-12 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/172

under review by the co-editors

close ACTION-172

<trackbot> ACTION-172 rewrite intro to be clear on what we mean by ontology closed

close ACTION-174

<trackbot> ACTION-174 check if ontology document says that type of mapping specifies if there is a loss in semantics closed

ACTION-176?

<trackbot> ACTION-176 -- Joakim Söderberg to contact browser implementors to review the API document -- due 2009-11-13 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/176

Joakim: I sent a mail to Dave. We also got a reply from Opera.

close ACTION-176

<trackbot> ACTION-176 Contact browser implementors to review the API document closed

ACTION-175?

<trackbot> ACTION-175 -- Felix Sasaki to define data type mappings as soon as the data types for the formats are defined -- due 2009-11-12 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/175

text has been included

close ACTION-185

<trackbot> ACTION-185 rigo@w3.org to ask pling wg to provide text on including policy information closed

ACTION-189?

<trackbot> ACTION-189 -- Tobias Bürger to work on the the subproperties (http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/wiki/Sub_Types) -- due 2009-11-13 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/189

Joakim: is this still relevant?

Werner: it has been postponed
... we can keep it as a reminder

Joakim: can we change the description of this action?

Werner: the decision is to handle subproperties in a generic way
... and may be in the future define specific subproperties.

Updated ACTION-189 to mark it "postponed"

<tmichel> the Requirements document seems to be here http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-req/mediaont-req.html

<tmichel> at least it is the one linked from the WG home page

ACTION-192?

<trackbot> ACTION-192 -- Joakim Söderberg to and everyone to review the Requirements document before 1/12 -- due 2009-12-01 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/track/actions/192

Wonsuk: we got some feedback on the document
... we will issue a new version next tuesday

close ACTION-192

<trackbot> ACTION-192 And everyone to review the Requirements document before 1/12 closed

Joakim: I remind everyone to take time to update their table

Wonsuk: I tried to update the table with Amaya, but I failed.
... can you remind the details to gain access to the file?

Thierry: get in touch with me, I'll give you the details.

<joakim> Wonsuk: the trick is to get the link correct:

<joakim> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/ontology10/WD/ID3.html

<joakim> becomes

<joakim> http://jigedit.w3.org/jsderber/WWW/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/ontology10/WD/ID3.html

Thierry: the WG homepage has 2 sections
... documents in WG space, and drafts in developments
... I will remove the mapping tables from the 2nd section
... because we are now working on the version from the WG space.

<joakim> This is the current version.

<joakim> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/ontology10/WD/mapping_table.html

Werner: the version from the draft was exported from XLS

Thierry: we have decided to stop working on the XLS, and edit the XHTML direcectly
... in the WG space;
... so I will remove the one in "drats", which is frozen and outdated.
... (both HTML and XLS files)
... I will check that we do not lose any information in the process.
... I will also remove the Ontology document from the WG space,
... since we do not work on this one.
... Hence each document will be present at exactly one place
... which will avoid confusion.

action tmichel to send a mail to the group explaining the different document spaces and why some documents are to be removed

<trackbot> Created ACTION-200 - Send a mail to the group explaining the different document spaces and why some documents are to be removed [on Thierry Michel - due 2009-12-15].

close ACTION-199

<trackbot> ACTION-199 Daniel to check availability of phone conference bridge and send info to joakim closed

Ontology document update

Wonsuk summarizes the current state of the document.

Test suites

Joakim: the test suite should be ready by the time we have the specification issued
... Does Thierry has any recommendation about how to proceed?

Thierry: experience from other WGs (SMIL):
... identify functionalities
... provide test for each functionality
... assign two people to each functionality
... so that each can verify that the test is correct
... Another solution :
... some company have test suites for testing their own implementations
... Quite different from the W3C approach, where each test is expected to be quite atomic.

The goal is to make sure that two implementors will interpret the functionality the same way

scribe: and implement it in an interoperable way.
... So there should be 1 test <-> 1 functionality

Joakim: will our test be made complicated by the fact that we envision both client-side and server-side implementations?

Werner: server-side implementations could be hidden by a facade javascript library
... so the same test could be applied to client-side and server-side implementations.

pchampin: +1 to Werner

Thierry: we don't need an implementation that passes all the tests.
... one product can pass only 1/2 tests, another product only 1/3
... The requirement is that *each* test has 2 implementations that pass it.
... Or we can not become CR.

But there is no requirement for an implementation passing 100% tests.

pchampin: that is an important distinction, indeed.

Thierry: once we agree that the specification is stable enough,
... then we should list functionalities and assign people to test cases.
... We should start to do this in last call.
... But this is a very busy phase : lot of comments to be processed.

Joakim: hopefuly, the spec will be quite stable by the next F2F.

Thierry: the question of the test suites should be raised at the F2F.

<joakim> agree, can't access it either!

:-(

seems to last...

thierry, are you still there?

- DRAFT -

MAWG

08 Dec 2009

Attendees

Contents

minutes approval

open action items

Ontology document update

Test suites

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output