IRC log of mediafrag on 2011-04-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

09:01:50 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #mediafrag
09:01:50 [RRSAgent]
logging to
09:01:52 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
09:01:52 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #mediafrag
09:01:54 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be IA_MFWG
09:01:54 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see IA_MFWG()5:00AM scheduled to start now
09:01:55 [trackbot]
Meeting: Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
09:01:55 [trackbot]
Date: 06 April 2011
09:02:02 [jackjansen]
zakim, code?
09:02:02 [Zakim]
the conference code is 3724 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), jackjansen
09:02:05 [Zakim]
IA_MFWG()5:00AM has now started
09:02:06 [Zakim]
09:02:12 [Zakim]
+ +
09:02:31 [foolip]
Zakim, how do I let you know which caller I am then?
09:02:31 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, foolip.
09:02:35 [foolip]
Zakim, that figures
09:02:35 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'that figures', foolip
09:02:38 [Zakim]
+ +
09:02:47 [Zakim]
+ +329331aacc
09:03:19 [foolip]
Zakim, mute me
09:03:19 [Zakim]
foolip should now be muted
09:03:20 [raphael]
09:03:23 [raphael]
Chair: Raphael
09:03:32 [raphael]
Regrets: Erik, Silvia, Thomas
09:03:41 [Zakim]
+ +31.20.592.aadd
09:03:47 [raphael]
Present: Yves, Davy, Yves, Raphael, Jack
09:03:49 [jackjansen]
zakim, aadd is me
09:03:49 [Zakim]
+jackjansen; got it
09:03:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
09:04:32 [raphael]
Scribe: raphael
09:04:48 [raphael]
Scribenick: raphael
09:04:56 [raphael]
Topic: 1. Admin
09:05:27 [raphael]
PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the last week telecon:
09:05:29 [foolip]
09:05:31 [raphael]
09:05:32 [davy]
09:05:36 [raphael]
minutes accepted
09:05:37 [Yves]
09:05:43 [raphael]
close ACTION-215
09:05:44 [trackbot]
ACTION-215 Poke people and encourage them to join the telecons closed
09:05:55 [raphael]
Topic: 2. HTML5 Bugs
09:06:00 [raphael]
09:06:00 [trackbot]
ACTION-213 -- Silvia Pfeiffer to submit the proposed list of bugs to HTML5 -- due 2011-03-23 -- OPEN
09:06:00 [trackbot]
09:06:07 [raphael]
close ACTIOn-213
09:06:07 [trackbot]
ACTION-213 Submit the proposed list of bugs to HTML5 closed
09:06:30 [raphael]
4 bugs now in the tracker
09:06:30 [raphael]
09:06:35 [raphael]
09:06:37 [raphael]
09:06:39 [raphael]
09:07:11 [foolip]
not really
09:07:18 [foolip]
(sorry, I'm muted)
09:07:38 [foolip]
I've replied
09:08:55 [foolip]
09:10:24 [raphael]
Topic: 3. TEST CASES
09:10:41 [jackjansen]
09:10:48 [raphael]
zakim, ack jackjansen
09:10:48 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
09:11:34 [raphael]
UA test cases:
09:11:35 [foolip]
09:11:46 [raphael]
Server test cases:
09:11:47 [foolip]
Zakim, unmute me
09:11:47 [Zakim]
foolip should no longer be muted
09:12:14 [raphael]
Jack: test cases are made for testing the spec and not for particular implementations
09:12:38 [raphael]
Philip: what does it mean? test cases are made for implementations
09:13:09 [raphael]
Jack: no, because test cases are made for making sure the wording of the spec can at least be interpreted the same way by 2 different people
09:13:45 [raphael]
Davy: I also think we should not battle for this, we mean roughly the same thing
09:15:12 [Yves]
well, it's those corner cases that are important, testing the spec by implementing is indeed to see if people got the same reading, but also if the coverage of the issue raised by implementation is good enough in the spec
09:15:31 [raphael]
Davy: let's start for the UA test cases
09:15:44 [foolip]
Zakim, mute me
09:15:44 [Zakim]
foolip should now be muted
09:15:45 [raphael]
09:16:14 [raphael]
... we have 60 Test Cases
09:18:04 [raphael]
Davy: I will go over the list of TC, and you should shout if you disagree
09:18:17 [davy]
09:18:56 [foolip]
Zakim, unmute me
09:18:56 [Zakim]
foolip should no longer be muted
09:19:50 [foolip]
npttimedef = [ deftimeformat ":"] ( npttime [ "," npttime ] ) / ( "," npttime )
09:20:02 [foolip]
09:20:53 [raphael]
TC 1 is wrong ... syntax is invalid
09:21:04 [raphael]
... it should be equivalent to 27
09:21:08 [raphael]
... but we should test it
09:21:15 [raphael]
09:21:19 [raphael]
s/TC 1/TC1
09:21:23 [davy]
09:22:57 [raphael]
Philip: I also disagree on this one ... I think it should be an error
09:23:18 [raphael]
Jack: no, since the intervals are half-open
09:23:54 [raphael]
Philip: it means that it will be a still image?
09:24:04 [raphael]
Jack: no, it means TC2 and TC3 are equivalent
09:24:35 [raphael]
... start of the interval is inclusive, and end of the interval is exclusive
09:25:14 [Yves]
TC2 with start=end mean display this point in time (one picture in a video?)
09:26:15 [raphael]
Should we enforce e>s
09:26:43 [raphael]
Philip: it is also reasonable to have e=s
09:26:58 [raphael]
Jack: I think I would prefer half-open intervals
09:27:52 [raphael]
Raphael: but Jack, is [3,3) valid?
09:28:44 [raphael]
Philip: I think it should be considered as an invalid range
09:29:31 [raphael]
... so the whole resource should be requested
09:29:48 [raphael]
... the UA has detected with its logic that this is an invalid range
09:30:36 [raphael]
Davy: instead of requesting the whole resource, we could just request the include-setup
09:30:56 [raphael]
Philip: this is the general problem of what to do with invalid range
09:31:01 [raphael]
... again similar to TC27
09:31:30 [homata]
homata has joined #mediafrag
09:31:34 [homata__]
homata__ has joined #mediafrag
09:32:20 [davy_]
davy_ has joined #mediafrag
09:32:24 [raphael]
Raphael: Philip and Davy prefer to request the whole resource
09:32:46 [raphael]
... Silvia will perhaps prefer to request only the setup data
09:33:14 [raphael]
... Jack does not care, Yves has a slight preference to display a still image but just want we specify what should it be
09:33:51 [raphael]
Philip: I think we should just ignore invalid ranges to simplify implementations
09:34:01 [jackjansen]
I don't care, but I agree with Yves that we should specify it.
09:34:45 [foolip]
Zakim, mute me
09:34:45 [Zakim]
foolip should now be muted
09:35:58 [raphael]
Raphael: TC2, TC3, TC27 (and perhaps other TC) will request the entire resource ... except if Silvia strongly disagree
09:36:09 [raphael]
09:36:10 [raphael]
09:36:12 [davy_]
09:36:39 [foolip]
Zakim, unmute me
09:36:39 [Zakim]
foolip should no longer be muted
09:36:43 [davy_]
09:36:46 [foolip]
09:36:59 [davy_]
09:39:59 [Yves]
you can't know in advance that you are requesting the whole resource, right?
09:40:07 [foolip]
Range: bytes=x-y
09:40:34 [raphael]
zakim, ack davy
09:40:34 [Zakim]
I see foolip on the speaker queue
09:40:40 [foolip]
Zakim, mute me
09:40:40 [Zakim]
foolip should now be muted
09:41:06 [raphael]
Davy: I can add a 4th option with a Range request expressed in bytes
09:42:09 [foolip]
Zakim, unmute me
09:42:09 [Zakim]
foolip should no longer be muted
09:43:12 [raphael]
Philip: we should not specify all the possible ways, but just make sure we can request byte ranges request for TC4
09:43:31 [foolip]
Zakim, mute me
09:43:31 [Zakim]
foolip should now be muted
09:44:42 [raphael]
Raphael: for TC4, add the possibility to issue a Range request expressed in bytes
09:45:01 [foolip]
Zakim, unmute me
09:45:01 [Zakim]
foolip should no longer be muted
09:45:09 [raphael]
09:45:23 [raphael]
Philip: the byte ranges could be different
09:45:37 [raphael]
... should we just write x-y ?
09:46:16 [foolip]
Zakim, mute me
09:46:16 [Zakim]
foolip should now be muted
09:46:21 [raphael]
Jack: I'm concerned about readability of the table
09:46:31 [raphael]
... so we could add at the top this is just possible outcomes
09:46:47 [raphael]
... for the byte ranges requests (depending on how UA caches things anyway)
09:46:47 [foolip]
Zakim, unmute me
09:46:47 [Zakim]
foolip should no longer be muted
09:49:26 [raphael]
Philip: we should also add on the top of the table that we could have a number of range requests (not a single one)
09:49:57 [raphael]
Davy: the column 4 meant that either the UA has knowledge about the media or it has not ... it does say how he got this information
09:51:00 [raphael]
Jack: will this column 4 be used for automatic testing ?
09:51:20 [raphael]
... if yes, then Philip's implementation will fail on all test cases
09:51:42 [raphael]
Davy: we just ignore the first request of Philip's implementation
09:51:49 [raphael]
... the include-setup one
09:53:44 [raphael]
Davy: is it important that we log/check the HTTP request?
09:54:13 [raphael]
... is it important how the UA get the MF visualization right?
09:55:10 [raphael]
Philip: checking the HTTP implementation is secondary, we absolutely need to test the playback behavior
09:56:06 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
09:57:55 [Yves]
main thing is defining the semantic of the #frag, then the http interaction is optional
10:01:50 [raphael]
Raphael: my UA download the entire resource and just seek to the start of the fragment on client side, and stop playing at the end of the fragment ... is this a conforming implementation ?
10:03:08 [raphael]
Yves: we need to check the playback in the UA, not the network
10:03:21 [Zakim]
10:03:22 [Zakim]
10:03:22 [Zakim]
10:03:23 [Zakim]
10:03:23 [Zakim]
IA_MFWG()5:00AM has ended
10:03:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were Yves, +, +, +329331aacc, Raphael, foolip, Davy, +31.20.592.aadd, jackjansen
10:03:43 [raphael]
Jack: servers might not be MF compliant and the UA should not be penalized
10:03:56 [raphael]
Rphael: it's noon, thanks all for attending
10:04:02 [raphael]
10:04:08 [raphael]
... are you all here next week
10:04:10 [raphael]
ALL: yes
10:04:15 [raphael]
Topic: 4. AOB
10:04:33 [raphael]
Next week, we keep discussing all TC, that will include the changes of Davy!
10:04:38 [raphael]
Round of applause for his work
10:04:45 [raphael]
Meeting adjourned
10:04:49 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
10:07:53 [raphael]
ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
10:07:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate raphael
10:07:56 [davy_]
davy_ has left #mediafrag
10:08:38 [raphael]
zakim, bye
10:08:38 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #mediafrag
10:08:42 [raphael]
RRSAgent, bye
10:08:42 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items