See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 07 December 2011
<doublec> haha, yes, need more people
<doublec> silvia was here earlier
<silvia> can I be here just on irc for now?
PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the last telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/11/30-mediafrag-minutes.html
Raphael: is there a minimal delay before transitioning to PR
Yves: it is written in the
... in the spec, written until December 8th!
Raphael: for me, we have 4
features at risk
... track and id dimensions
... smpte and clock for specifying time in the temporal dimension
... is there more ?
<doublec> that sounds right to me
<doublec> that's correct
<Yves> for smpte and clock; clock is used for streaming, but we don't have implementation, smpte is more tuned to boardcasters
<Yves> raphael: talked to Jack, smpte was in smil but not tested
<Yves> there are no implementation, so it would be ok to get them out of the spec, but move it to another document (note)
<Yves> same for track and id
<Yves> someone in the future can take this (or just implement it)
<Yves> we should have media fragment 1.0 basic, and media fragment advanced, a note containing everything not implemented (smpte, clock, time, protocol, rtsp)
<Yves> Yves: sounds good
<doublec> doublec: I think that's a good approach
<silvia> Yves: sounds good
Raphael: and do you agree that track and id SHOULD also go in this second document in the note?
Erik: dependance on the HTML5
media track api, so based on the rationale we keep on the spec
only what is _now_ implemented
... and we move the rest in the note so that people can implement it in the future
<scribe> ACTION: troncy to mail the group about the decision of what will be in the spec and what will not [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/07-mediafrag-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-247 - Mail the group about the decision of what will be in the spec and what will not [on Raphaël Troncy - due 2011-12-14].
Raphael: is there people who want
to give a entire fresh look at the spec?
... I personnally want, and plan to do that the week before Christmas
<silvia> feel free - as long as it's still readable :-)
Erik: should we transition
between Christmas and New Year Eve?
... I don't want that a decision taken early in January is refused because out of the charter?
Yves: we need to check with Philippe but I'm confident
Erik: let's make things
... Between Chrismas and New Years Eve ... the spec should be frozen (edited by Raphael)
... Implementation report should be frozen (edited by davy)
... the spec will be finalized *before* Christmas
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to write a mail with our timeline to check approval with Philippe [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/07-mediafrag-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-248 - Write a mail with our timeline to check approval with Philippe [on Erik Mannens - due 2011-12-14].
<scribe> ACTION: troncy to tidy up the spec before December 24th [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/07-mediafrag-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-249 - Tidy up the spec before December 24th [on Raphaël Troncy - due 2011-12-14].
<scribe> ACTION: davy to tidy up the implementation report before December 24th [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/07-mediafrag-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-250 - Tidy up the implementation report before December 24th [on Davy Van Deursen - due 2011-12-14].
Raphael: we could then transtion to PR as soon as all documents are frozen
Davy: nobody disagree with the
test cases, could be we formally approve them?
... these are the last 4 test cases
Raphael: no disagreement?
Test cases approved
Raphael: suggest to make 2 sections in the implementation report, one with the feaures of the spec, and one with the features in the note (at risk)
<trackbot> ACTION-245 -- Raphaël Troncy to clarify whether Dailymotion will provide an implementation or not -- due 2011-12-07 -- OPEN
scribe: following up this action
given the reply received today by Dailymotion
... temporal dimension only for a Flash player
scribe: should we contact them for an implementation report
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to contact the Europeana developers to check the feasibility of having a new implementation report [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/07-mediafrag-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-251 - Contact the Europeana developers to check the feasibility of having a new implementation report [on Erik Mannens - due 2011-12-14].
<trackbot> ACTION-246 -- Erik Mannens to update the issues and close the issues that can be closed -- due 2011-12-07 -- OPEN
<trackbot> ACTION-246 Update the issues and close the issues that can be closed closed
<trackbot> ISSUE-17 -- Media Fragment track names and IRIs -- closed
<trackbot> ISSUE-20 -- Create a IETF draft at CR stage explaining what the media fragment semantics will be for video/*, image/*, audio/* -- closed
Yves: during the CR transition
call, we discuss this and agree that we will not edit such a
... the issue can be closed
Erik: Philippe said he would have a look
Yves: I will ping Philippe to make sure he agrees with closing this issue
Raphael: do we have a telecon next week?
Erik: yes, even 10 minutes
... for status update
Raphael: thinking of gathering testimonial
<doublec> we've documented what we support and what version it'll be in btw: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_HTML5_audio_and_video#Specifying_playback_range
<doublec> yep, I can do a testimonial
Raphael: from EURECOM, CWI, IBBT, Mozilla, Silvia?
<silvia> what do you need?
Raphael: silvia, think of writing a testimonial when the spec will be a REC :-) See examples of testimonials when there are rec
<silvia> what, like http://www.w3.org/2001/09/svg1-testimonial ?
<silvia> I sure can do something
<silvia> I'll likely write a blog post anyway
yes, silvia, for example
<silvia> no problem
scribe: but this is for January :-)