00:09:14 <gitbot> gitbot has joined #html-wg
00:09:14 <gitbot> 01[13html01] 15rubys pushed 2 new commits to 06feature/whatwg: 02https://github.com/w3c/html/compare/5069600eb2e9...a9ffe895f193
00:09:14 <gitbot> 13html/06feature/whatwg 145eb5e2b 15ianh: [e] (0) Clarify what we mean by 'poster frame' of an animation....
00:09:14 <gitbot> 13html/06feature/whatwg 14a9ffe89 15ianh: [e] (0) Be clearer about how preparsing handles running out of bytes....
00:09:14 <gitbot> gitbot has left #html-wg
00:42:23 <glenn_> glenn_ has joined #html-wg
00:43:17 <karl> karl has joined #html-wg
00:52:23 <glenn> glenn has joined #html-wg
01:15:24 <cabanier> cabanier has joined #html-wg
02:14:47 <johndrinkwater> johndrinkwater has joined #html-wg
02:19:47 <johndrinkwater> johndrinkwater has joined #html-wg
02:33:42 <darobin> darobin has joined #html-wg
02:34:12 <darobin> MikeSmith: you're around man?
02:36:36 <SteveF> SteveF has joined #html-wg
02:55:30 <johndrinkwater> johndrinkwater has joined #html-wg
03:33:30 <silvia> silvia has joined #html-wg
04:07:54 <MikeSmith> darobin: here now
04:08:43 <MikeSmith> at Denny's near my hotel
04:16:53 <silvia> silvia has joined #html-wg
04:26:02 <glenn_> glenn_ has joined #html-wg
04:52:55 <Jedi> Jedi has joined #html-wg
04:57:20 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
04:58:08 <Jedi> Jedi has joined #html-wg
05:00:49 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:01:08 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
05:04:09 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:05:35 <Jedi> Jedi has joined #html-wg
05:05:46 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:09:50 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
05:09:58 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:13:50 <Jedi> Jedi has joined #html-wg
05:22:12 <MarkS> MarkS has joined #html-wg
05:22:41 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:27:07 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:28:17 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:33:32 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
05:34:13 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:38:11 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:41:01 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
05:44:40 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
05:45:03 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:46:21 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:46:35 <silvia> silvia has joined #html-wg
05:47:25 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:48:38 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
05:54:09 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:56:50 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
05:58:11 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
05:59:01 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:02:12 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:06:21 <silvia> silvia has joined #html-wg
06:13:03 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
06:15:25 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:16:38 <tH> tH has joined #html-wg
06:17:52 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:20:01 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
06:21:10 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:25:31 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:27:42 <stommepoes> stommepoes has joined #html-wg
06:28:15 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
06:28:24 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:49:46 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
06:51:04 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
06:52:55 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
06:53:21 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
07:00:03 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
07:00:37 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
07:04:38 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
07:05:15 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
07:12:34 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
07:27:12 <Dashiva> Dashiva has joined #html-wg
07:44:14 <silvia> silvia has joined #html-wg
08:02:29 <nonge> nonge has joined #html-wg
08:38:54 <tinkster> tinkster has joined #html-wg
08:59:57 <nonge_> nonge_ has joined #html-wg
09:09:33 <SteveF> SteveF has joined #html-wg
09:22:47 <silvia> silvia has joined #html-wg
09:25:14 <yoav> yoav has joined #html-wg
09:27:15 <Jedi> Jedi has joined #html-wg
09:50:12 <Jedi> Jedi has joined #html-wg
09:57:09 <Lachy> Lachy has joined #html-wg
10:21:15 <Jedi> Jedi has joined #html-wg
10:27:25 <tinkster> tinkster has joined #html-wg
10:29:41 <abarsto> abarsto has joined #html-wg
10:36:10 <tobie> tobie has joined #html-wg
12:22:17 <SteveF> SteveF has joined #html-wg
12:34:24 <gbabula> gbabula has joined #html-wg
13:16:57 <davidb> davidb has joined #html-wg
13:54:33 <MarkS> MarkS has joined #html-wg
14:00:54 <davidb_> davidb_ has joined #html-wg
14:01:54 <glenn> glenn has joined #html-wg
14:10:39 <plh> plh has joined #html-wg
14:14:50 <danielfilho|w> danielfilho|w has joined #html-wg
14:51:22 <davidb_> davidb_ has joined #html-wg
15:09:11 <darobin> darobin has joined #html-wg
15:33:08 <plh> plh has joined #html-wg
15:47:45 <tinkster> tinkster has joined #html-wg
16:02:29 <tlr> tlr has joined #html-wg
16:10:49 <MarkS> MarkS has joined #html-wg
16:12:52 <timeless> timeless has joined #html-wg
16:18:08 <cabanier> cabanier has joined #html-wg
16:18:19 <darobin> darobin has joined #html-wg
16:19:57 <MichaelC_SJO> MichaelC_SJO has joined #html-wg
16:20:47 <krisk> krisk has joined #html-wg
16:20:54 <adrianba> adrianba has joined #html-wg
16:21:05 <timeless> trackbot, start meeting
16:21:07 <yosuke> yosuke has joined #html-wg
16:21:07 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:21:07 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #html-wg
16:21:09 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be html_wg
16:21:09 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
16:21:10 <trackbot> Meeting: HTML Weekly Teleconference
16:21:10 <trackbot> Date: 23 April 2013
16:21:31 <timeless> s/HTML Weekly Teleconference/HTML Interim Face to Face/
16:21:50 <Josh_Soref> Josh_Soref has joined #html-wg
16:21:55 <timeless> scribe: Josh_Soref
16:21:59 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
16:22:17 <timeless> scribenick: timeless
16:22:30 <paulc> paulc has joined #html-wg
16:22:39 <glenn_> glenn_ has joined #html-wg
16:22:43 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:22:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
16:22:44 <ddorwin> ddorwin has joined #html-wg
16:22:48 <chaals> chaals has joined #html-wg
16:22:53 <timeless> Topic: Introductions
16:22:54 <Travis> Travis has joined #html-wg
16:23:04 <timeless> [ Everyone introduced themselves ]
16:23:11 <timeless> Topic: Agenda bashing
16:23:12 <adrianba> Present+ adrianba
16:23:16 <Mark_Vickers> Mark_Vickers has joined #html-wg
16:23:17 <chaals> Present+ chaals
16:23:21 <timeless> paulc: we'll start with an Unconference
16:23:35 <timeless> ... ruby has this page open with the schedule
16:24:06 <rubys> rubys has joined #html-wg
16:24:14 <timeless> ... there are requests from the Media TF
16:24:19 <timeless> ... for a session on EME
16:24:26 <timeless> ... - current bugs
16:24:43 <timeless> ... - Accessibility TF wants to talk w/ them about alternate media in the clear
16:24:52 <timeless> ... I'm proposing to do these after lunch
16:25:03 <timeless> ... and i'm proposing to do MSE first
16:25:08 <timeless> ... it should take 30 minutes?
16:25:15 <timeless> .. eric(?)
16:25:17 <aizu> aizu has joined #html-wg
16:25:20 <timeless> ... i'm assuming lunch is 12p-1
16:25:26 <timeless> ... we'll do MSE 1p-2
16:25:33 <timeless> ... then EME after that for 90 mins
16:25:40 <timeless> ... there are a fair number of open topics there
16:25:49 <JF> JF has joined #html-wg
16:25:50 <timeless> ... a larger section on Candidate REC status
16:25:56 <timeless> ... - update on testsuite, coverage, status
16:26:04 <timeless> ... krisk wanted to talk about github and branching
16:26:21 <timeless> ... i suggested working on figuring out which parts of the document are passing exit criteria
16:26:25 <cabanier1> cabanier1 has joined #html-wg
16:26:28 <timeless> ... and talking about Features AT RISK
16:26:45 <timeless> ... MicroData met yesterday
16:26:53 <timeless> ... i suggested to darobin that this is a fairly large topic
16:26:55 <Jungkee> Jungkee has joined #html-wg
16:27:03 <timeless> ... that we start it this morning
16:27:07 <Jungkee> Present+ Jungkee_Song
16:27:10 <timeless> ... we'll finish this section w/in half an hour
16:27:16 <adrianba> adrianba has joined #html-wg
16:27:20 <timeless> ... and then the rest of the morning to start on [hand-pointed] topic
16:27:24 <anraud> anraud has joined #html-wg
16:27:32 <timeless> ... the WG has 2 docs out to CR and our job is to get them past
16:27:37 <CyrilRa> CyrilRa has joined #html-wg
16:27:46 <cabanier> cabanier has joined #html-wg
16:27:53 <timeless> ... ruby: can you put CR status for 9:30a-10:15
16:28:00 <timeless> ... and part 2, 10:30a-12noon
16:28:05 <wonsuk> wonsuk has joined #html-wg
16:28:06 <wseltzer> wseltzer has joined #html-wg
16:28:07 <timeless> ... that covers the big things
16:28:13 <timeless> ... for this morning and early this afternoon
16:28:23 <timeless> ... Moving the polyglot spec forward
16:28:26 <timeless> ... eliot?
16:28:40 <timeless> eliot: i want to hear where people's feelings are
16:28:45 <timeless> ... it could be 10mins or 45mins
16:28:52 <CyrilRa> Anyone on phone bridge? Been on bridge from Agenda for a while (and on IRC Channel), on my own…
16:28:56 <timeless> paulc: ruby, open a slot tomorrow morning at 9am
16:29:42 <bryan> bryan has joined #html-wg
16:30:01 <bryan> present+ Bryan_Sullivan
16:30:02 <timeless> paulc: darobin heartbeat, can i lump that w/ misc for tomorrow morning
16:30:07 <timeless> darobin: sure
16:30:14 <timeless> paulc: we want to talk about various documents
16:30:20 <eliot> eliot has joined #html-wg
16:30:20 <timeless> ... and we want at least oral concurrence
16:30:31 <krisk> krisk: F2F wiki http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2013-04-Agenda
16:30:45 <eliot> hober
16:30:56 <timeless> hober: did we schedule EME?
16:30:57 <CyrilRa> Update agenda to reflect IRC Channel
16:30:58 <timeless> paulc: yes
16:31:06 <edoyle> edoyle has joined #html-wg
16:31:35 <johnsim> johnsim has joined #html-wg
16:32:04 <timeless> paulc: assigning transcript to audio/video
16:32:09 <timeless> ... Accessibility TF wanted this
16:32:19 <timeless> ... foliet, do you have any idea how long it will take?
16:32:27 <timeless> foliet: 30mins? maybe longer
16:32:41 <timeless> paulc: ruby, put in post coffee tomorrow morning
16:33:00 <timeless> ... Web Perf issues re:HTML5
16:33:08 <timeless> ... put after coffee in misc 2
16:33:19 <cyns> cyns has joined #html-wg
16:33:22 <timeless> ... session on wiki "Extension Spec Status"
16:33:38 <timeless> ... Moving Image Description aka Longdesc
16:33:52 <timeless> ... - it has a FPWD, and the TF intends to take it to LC
16:33:55 <timeless> ... chaals ?
16:33:58 <timeless> chaals: at least 3 minutes
16:34:04 <timeless> paulc: put it in misc 2
16:34:20 <timeless> janina: some of us won't be here then
16:34:29 <timeless> paulc: ok, create a slot today @ 11:45a
16:34:35 <timeless> s/ok/ok, ruby,/
16:34:42 <timeless> ... i think that covers everything on the list
16:34:48 <timeless> ... anyone have anything else?
16:34:57 <timeless> ... darobin, looks like we have time for another testing slot tomorrow
16:35:00 <timeless> darobin: if we need it
16:35:07 <timeless> paulc: this group needs to figure out how to use the time
16:35:14 <timeless> ... we need to figure out which parts need testing, and which don't
16:35:30 <timeless> ... if we need to drive through the spec section by section, that's what we'll do
16:35:40 <timeless> ... call that "candidate testing part 2" tomorrow afternoon
16:35:43 <timeless> ... other topics?
16:35:48 <timeless> ... "New features for html 5.1?"
16:36:02 <timeless> plh: can we have a slot for HTML WG Charter?
16:36:36 <timeless> timeless has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2013-04-Agenda
16:36:42 <timeless> paulc: how much time?
16:36:44 <timeless> plh: 30mins
16:37:02 <jeff> jeff has joined #html-wg
16:38:11 <timeless> paulc: any other topics?
16:39:38 <acolwell> acolwell has joined #html-wg
16:41:05 <timeless> Topic: CR and Testing
16:41:31 <timeless> s/Topic: CR and Testing//
16:41:43 <timeless> plh: paulc, wanted Charter tomorrow
16:41:45 <timeless> paulc: ok
16:41:47 <timeless> Topic: CR and Testing
16:42:02 <cyns> cyns has joined #html-wg
16:42:15 <timeless> paulc: * HTML Test Suite coverage, gaps and status
16:42:15 <timeless> ... * Usage of Github and branching (Kris)
16:42:15 <timeless> ... * Review of which parts of HTML5 pass the "passive exit criteria"
16:42:15 <timeless> ... * Status of HTML 5.1 and Canvas open bugs
16:42:15 <timeless> ... * Status of Features at Risk (more, less?)
16:42:16 <timeless> ... * Getting Microdata to CR (Editorial team)
16:42:22 <timeless> ... i think we can do Microdata first
16:42:28 <timeless> ... does an editor want to speak?
16:42:35 <timeless> ... in December when we took HTML5 and Canvas to CR
16:42:44 <timeless> ... we had an Objection in taking Microdata to CR
16:42:51 <timeless> ... which is why it didn't go out at the same time
16:42:57 <timeless> ... we talked about this as chairs and editors
16:43:05 <timeless> ... i think we need a further update
16:43:12 <timeless> MikeSmith: we're even further blocked than before
16:43:15 <Bin_Hu> Bin_Hu has joined #html-wg
16:43:23 <timeless> ... we'll have fewer implementations potentially than when we spoke a few months ago
16:43:36 <timeless> ... the Google Blink team decided to yank the implementation of the Microdata DOM API
16:43:40 <abraud> abraud has joined #html-wg
16:43:43 <timeless> ... it's likely to disappear from WebKit also
16:43:56 <timeless> ... the Microdata specification defines some attributes that are extensions to the HTML language
16:44:03 <timeless> ... we don't have implementation conformance requirements
16:44:10 <timeless> ... we only have conformance requirements for validators
16:44:18 <timeless> ... the one thing we have is this DOM API
16:44:23 <timeless> ... we have 2
16:44:26 <timeless> ... we had one in Opera
16:44:39 <timeless> ... my understanding is Opera is End-Of-Lifing their web engine (Presto)
16:44:46 <chaals> q+
16:44:48 <timeless> ... and they'll be shipping WebKit/Chromium
16:44:54 <timeless> ... I don't think we can count the Opera engine
16:44:59 <timeless> ... we have one implementation in Mozilla (Gecko)
16:45:01 <timeless> ... unfortunately
16:45:07 <timeless> ... in discussing w/ the Chrome team
16:45:14 <timeless> ... they're not just yanking the implementation
16:45:28 <timeless> ... they're not interested in implementing the specification as spec'd
16:45:36 <timeless> ... we could work to go to CR
16:45:45 <timeless> ... but, six months from now, we're unlikely to be able to exit
16:45:50 <timeless> ... also, editorally
16:45:59 <timeless> ... there's no industry momentum behind Microdata
16:46:03 <timeless> ... it was nice at the time
16:46:22 <timeless> ... it lit a fire under the RDFa to force them to make their API fit to market
16:46:35 <timeless> ... it pushed the RDFa partisans to align w/ what we asked them to do
16:46:37 <timeless> ... now that it's done
16:46:46 <timeless> ... I don't think the entire world needs to work on two different
16:46:56 <timeless> ... Practically speaking, Schema.org started w/ Microdata
16:47:05 <timeless> ... but now RDFa has a lite version, which is quite usable
16:47:13 <darobin> [despite its terrible name]
16:47:17 <timeless> ... I don't think orgs like Schema.org which are using embedded metadata
16:47:20 <timeless> ... want to do things twice
16:47:34 <timeless> ... I don't think the investment is necessarily needed to continue
16:47:46 <timeless> ... I, myself, don't think it makes sense to continue to pursue this
16:47:48 <timeless> q?
16:47:51 <timeless> ack chaals
16:48:02 <timeless> chaals: I put myself on the queue to call Bollocks
16:48:13 <timeless> ... 1. Microdata is in large part not directed at browsers
16:48:21 <timeless> ... it's the least interesting application in many cases
16:48:30 <timeless> ... browser implementations aren't always the implementations you're looking for
16:48:32 <jernoble> jernoble has joined #html-wg
16:48:35 <timeless> ... in some things we do in HTML
16:48:40 <timeless> ... we couldn't care less if it's used in the browser
16:48:44 <timeless> ... things like Authoring systems
16:48:46 <markw_> markw_ has joined #html-wg
16:48:50 <timeless> ... for Microdata, it's for Data management systems
16:49:01 <timeless> ... you might lose Browser implementations
16:49:09 <timeless> ... Yandex has a Microdata implementation for schema.org
16:49:18 <timeless> ... and we can see interoperable
16:49:27 <CyrilRa> Any update on phone bridge?
16:49:29 <timeless> ... we don't really care if it's implemented in a browser
16:49:30 <rubys> q+
16:49:32 <MikeSmith> q+ to thank Chaals for volunteering to serve as the W3C editor for the Microdata CR spec
16:49:48 <timeless> ... we want to see if it's really implementable
16:49:57 <timeless> ... the approach for "what is a valid implementation requirement"
16:50:02 <timeless> ... should be opened up a bit
16:50:07 <paulc> rrsagent, generate minutes
16:50:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html paulc
16:50:08 <timeless> ... there are boatloads of Microdata in Russia
16:50:20 <timeless> ... we use Microdata in Yandex, which we implemented early
16:50:23 <timeless> ... so there's a lot of it
16:50:33 <timeless> ... we lead the Russian market
16:50:38 <timeless> ... as Google leads the US market
16:50:53 <timeless> ... i'm not necessarily disagreeing w/ MikeSmith 's conclusion
16:51:04 <timeless> ... but i'm disagreeing your steps
16:51:09 <timeless> ack MikeSmith
16:51:09 <Zakim> MikeSmith, you wanted to thank Chaals for volunteering to serve as the W3C editor for the Microdata CR spec
16:51:16 <timeless> MikeSmith: if you are invested in it
16:51:20 <timeless> ... then you're welcome to edit
16:51:24 <timeless> ack rubys
16:51:32 <timeless> rubys: i want people to focus on actual recommendations
16:51:40 <timeless> ... MikeSmith was talking about Terminating as a NOTE
16:51:51 <timeless> ... and that was what i heard
16:51:51 <SteveF> SteveF has joined #html-wg
16:51:59 <timeless> ... but from chaals, you said we don't care about the html bit?
16:52:06 <timeless> ... but we want the rest?
16:52:14 <timeless> chaals: i was trying to avoid committing to find an editor
16:52:19 <timeless> rubys: if we don't have an editor, we should terminate
16:52:27 <timeless> chaals: we should do things for reasons that make sense
16:52:35 <timeless> ... if we don't have an editor, no one cares about it, we walk away
16:52:47 <timeless> paulc: when chairs did a call for editors last summer
16:52:56 <timeless> ... we had a lot of answers, but they had limited experience
16:52:59 <timeless> ... and we turned them down
16:53:09 <timeless> ... don't assume the only possible editors are in the room
16:53:17 <timeless> ... people might not have a primary interest in Microdata
16:53:26 <timeless> ... but they might volunteer to get editing experience
16:53:35 <timeless> ... the right way forward is for chairs to do a call for volunteers
16:53:37 <timeless> MikeSmith: yes
16:53:45 <timeless> ... if a WG, esp a high profile WG like this
16:53:48 <timeless> ... puts out a call for editors
16:53:56 <timeless> ... we'll have a lot of people who will step up and say "yes"
16:54:01 <timeless> ... "oh, btw, what is Microdata?"
16:54:11 <timeless> ... we don't want people who don't know what it is to step up
16:54:14 <timeless> ... they won't stick around
16:54:29 <darobin> q?
16:54:29 <timeless> ... abundance of potential editors isn't a solution
16:54:44 <timeless> rubys: you suggested the APIs are AT RISK
16:54:50 <timeless> ... we could take some decision on the APIs
16:54:57 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #html-wg
16:54:59 <timeless> ... you were suggesting is that the parts that chaals spoke to
16:55:03 <timeless> ... search engines, processing systems
16:55:07 <timeless> ... are the attributes
16:55:13 <timeless> ... and we could propose to move them somewhere else?
16:55:18 <timeless> rubys: when we went to CR
16:55:22 <timeless> ... we had a missing section
16:55:31 <timeless> ... we spoke about moving it to the HTML base spec
16:55:55 <timeless> paulc: i don't think people in the room understand what happened at the Director's TR Call for Microdata
16:56:02 <timeless> ... I want to refresh people's minds
16:56:07 <timeless> MikeSmith: i'm trying to remember that call
16:56:11 <timeless> ... if someone else on the call?
16:56:23 <timeless> darobin: we had a Director's Call to move Microdata to CR
16:56:34 <timeless> ... during the call, we noticed a section had gone AWOL
16:56:47 <timeless> ... there was a merge error from the WHAT WG spec
16:56:58 <timeless> ... the call failed, because we couldn't ship a spec missing an entire section
16:57:04 <timeless> ... after which the Blink announcement happened
16:57:07 <timeless> rubys: three things
16:57:09 <timeless> ... 1. API
16:57:13 <timeless> ... - no one in room has interest
16:57:17 <timeless> ... 2. Definition of Microdata
16:57:27 <timeless> ... - Yandex is interested, but not necessarily to find an editor
16:57:34 <timeless> chaals: if you want the spec in Russian...
16:57:42 <timeless> rubys: 3. Microdata in HTML
16:57:48 <timeless> ... which is currently in the HTML spec
16:57:56 <timeless> ... it should probably be tombstoned
16:58:02 <timeless> ... if decision is to make it a FINAL NOTE
16:58:02 <MikeSmith> q+ to say that another possibility is that we just put Microdata back into the spec where it started from
16:58:07 <timeless> ... it should probably be moved back
16:58:16 <timeless> paulc: why wouldn't we fix the missing section
16:58:24 <timeless> ... and go to CR w/ the API marked at risk
16:58:32 <timeless> rubys: if there's interest and an editor
16:58:35 <timeless> ... that makes sense
16:58:44 <timeless> paulc: trying to make sense w/o worrying on editor
16:58:51 <timeless> darobin: i don't think we should focus on finding an editor
16:58:57 <timeless> ... i don't think it's a lot of editorial work
16:59:09 <chaals> q-
16:59:10 <timeless> ... tombstoning, dropping API, etc, all are short
16:59:15 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
16:59:17 <timeless> ... if there's strong interest from Yandex
16:59:36 <timeless> ... we can probably take to CR w/o the API
16:59:44 <timeless> ... if you want us to take it
17:00:00 <timeless> ... show us another company w/ interest
17:00:19 <timeless> MikeSmith: we made a decision a long time ago to split the Microdata stuff out of the HTML spec
17:00:27 <cyns> cyns has joined #html-wg
17:00:35 <timeless> ... the upstream spec is continugous
17:00:42 <timeless> ... we could put it back there/leave it there
17:00:54 <timeless> ... part of why we pulled it out was political
17:01:15 <timeless> ... to show we didn't want to give it an unfair advantage over RDFa
17:01:22 <timeless> ... we could put it into HTML.next
17:01:32 <timeless> paulc: that's another
17:01:35 <timeless> ... alternative
17:01:41 <timeless> ... 1. go to CR w/ part of spec AT RISK
17:01:48 <timeless> ... 2. archive w/ WG NOTE
17:02:29 <rubys> q+
17:02:30 <timeless> ... 3. fold the attributes in HTML for 5.1 - as Yandex, and schema.org use them
17:02:41 <timeless> MikeSmith: 3 is what i'd suggest
17:02:48 <timeless> ... let's reduce the amount of extra work for myself
17:02:51 <timeless> darobin: not just you
17:03:15 <timeless> paulc: darobin, how much work is it to integrate back into HTML5.1?
17:03:19 <timeless> darobin: even less than the ohters
17:03:24 <timeless> s/ohters/others/
17:03:28 <timeless> ack MikeSmith
17:03:28 <Zakim> MikeSmith, you wanted to say that another possibility is that we just put Microdata back into the spec where it started from
17:03:34 <timeless> ack rubys
17:03:42 <timeless> rubys: MikeSmith, what do you propose to do w/ the API?
17:03:47 <timeless> MikeSmith: leave it there for now
17:03:57 <timeless> paulc: anyone in the room want to express an opinion on the three options?
17:04:09 <timeless> ... 1. go to CR w/ part of spec AT RISK
17:04:13 <darobin> [we could even come up with a better API that also covers RDFa]
17:04:13 <timeless> ... 2. archive w/ WG NOTE
17:04:23 <timeless> ... 3. fold the attributes in HTML for 5.1
17:04:33 <timeless> chaals: we'd like it to go to CR, so it isn't spinning around
17:04:43 <timeless> hober: i agree w/ MikeSmith, roll it into 5.1
17:04:56 <timeless> paulc: other opinions?
17:05:27 <timeless> Mark_Vickers: confused
17:05:32 <timeless> ... MikeSmith spoke about this
17:05:36 <timeless> ... can we get multiple implementations
17:05:43 <timeless> ... is everyone turning away from this?
17:05:49 <timeless> ... option 3, doesn't that cause more risk?
17:05:52 <timeless> ... to the 5.1 spec
17:05:57 <timeless> ... not getting multiple implementations?
17:06:00 <timeless> ... not getting things people want?
17:06:10 <timeless> ... and it seems to contradict the extensions spec model
17:06:15 <timeless> darobin: i understand your confusion
17:06:19 <timeless> ... putting it in 5.1
17:06:24 <timeless> ... a. it's less work for us
17:06:33 <timeless> ... b. it gives us more time, 5.1 target is 2016
17:06:43 <timeless> ... it doesn't push us to make a decision in the next six months
17:06:53 <timeless> ... give people a chance to use it, or give us a chance to notice it's completely dead
17:07:03 <timeless> ... re: relationship to extension specs
17:07:11 <timeless> ... it interacts w/ lots of other sections
17:07:25 <timeless> ... it interacts w/ syntax, drag and drop, etc.
17:07:30 <timeless> ... it's difficult to extract
17:07:34 <timeless> s/re:/c. re:/
17:07:41 <timeless> paulc: other questions/comments?
17:07:42 <yoav_> yoav_ has joined #html-wg
17:08:11 <timeless> paulc: chairs will take an action item for a proposal
17:08:32 <timeless> ... need to figure out if we want to do a CfC or something else, I expect to hear an objection if we do a CfC
17:08:39 <timeless> chaals: i doubt Yandex will raise an Objection
17:08:47 <timeless> ... unless we offer to pony up resources
17:08:51 <timeless> ... this isn't a hill we'll die on
17:08:57 <timeless> ... strong objection path is unlikely
17:09:05 <timeless> paulc: what if we move the attributes to 5.0?
17:09:15 <timeless> ... the reason this is in microdata5.0
17:09:22 <timeless> ... was because the WG made a decision to split out the content
17:09:32 <timeless> ... it's the attributes you're most interested in, right/
17:09:32 <rubys> action: sam to bring microdata proposals to the working group 1) terminate as a note, 2) take attributes to CR, 3) move to 5.1
17:09:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-225 - Bring microdata proposals to the working group 1) terminate as a note, 2) take attributes to CR, 3) move to 5.1 [on Sam Ruby - due 2013-04-30].
17:09:36 <timeless> s|/|?|
17:09:53 <timeless> chaals: yes
17:10:02 <timeless> paulc: why can't we just fold this back into 5.0?
17:10:12 <timeless> chaals: same political reasons as why we split it out
17:10:24 <timeless> MikeSmith: if we put the attributes back into the spec, it won't affect progress of the spec
17:10:29 <timeless> ... we don't have conformance requirements
17:10:34 <timeless> paulc: right, that's why i asked
17:10:43 <timeless> ... but chaals, i think you're right, we'd get an Objection
17:11:02 <timeless> [ Time check ]
17:11:33 <timeless> topic: HTML Test Suite coverage, gaps and status
17:12:03 <timeless> i/think we can do Microdata first/Topic: Getting Microdata to CR (Editorial team)/
17:12:07 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:12:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
17:12:07 <ArtB> zakim, code?
17:12:07 <Zakim> sorry, ArtB, I don't know what conference this is
17:27:26 <timeless> darobin: i suppose most of you are familiar w/ W3 process
17:27:32 <timeless> ... one of the things you need to go from CR to PR
17:27:36 <timeless> ... is a Test Suite
17:27:47 <timeless> ... to prove that the nice piece of prose is supported by implementations
17:27:53 <timeless> ... when you have a spec as large as HTML
17:27:58 <timeless> ... writing a Test Suite is a big task
17:28:03 <timeless> ... we put a lot of effort into it
17:28:09 <timeless> ... we did an extra push
17:28:29 <timeless> ... to ensure we have a good Test Suite, so we can exit CR on schedule
17:28:35 <paulc> Topic: HTML Test Suite coverage, gaps and status
17:28:39 <timeless> ... a few testing topics that I want to introduce
17:28:58 <timeless> ... the testing repository has moved to github
17:29:14 <krisk> krisk has joined #html-wg
17:29:59 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
17:30:49 <plh> zakim, list conference
17:30:49 <Zakim> I don't understand 'list conference', plh
17:30:51 <plh> zakim, list conferences
17:30:51 <Zakim> I see T&S_(DNTC)1:00PM, HTML_CG(F2F)12:00PM, W3C_DOCS()1:00PM active
17:30:52 <Zakim> also scheduled at this time are Team_(site-design)17:03Z, XML_ET-TF()11:00AM, SW_RDB2RDF()12:00PM, WAI_PF(Text)1:00PM
17:31:03 <plh> zaki, this is html_cg
17:31:03 <plh> zakim, this is html_cg
17:31:03 <Zakim> ok, plh; that matches HTML_CG(F2F)12:00PM
17:31:05 <krisk> See -> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests
17:31:19 <timeless> s/See //
17:31:36 <timeless> darobin: we have a relatively new repo on github
17:31:42 <timeless> ... in addition to HTML tests
17:31:52 <timeless> ... this is the repo for all w3 related technologies from W3C
17:31:55 <wonsuk> wonsuk has joined #html-wg
17:31:58 <timeless> ... possibly also for Khronos
17:32:03 <timeless> ... there's 2d canvas
17:32:12 <timeless> ... webapps tests
17:32:18 <timeless> ... an html directory - the html test suite
17:32:23 <timeless> ... in github fashion
17:32:26 <timeless> ... if you want to contribute
17:32:28 <timeless> ... you fork the repo
17:32:31 <timeless> ... clone it locally
17:32:33 <timeless> ... make changes
17:32:36 <timeless> ... push changes back
17:32:39 <timeless> ... make pull request
17:32:46 <timeless> ... someone working on test review team
17:32:53 <timeless> ... will give feedback or merge in
17:33:00 <timeless> ... we have a fairly straightforward workflow
17:33:08 <timeless> ... we had a test suite
17:33:16 <timeless> ... we noticed the bottleneck was in reviewing tests
17:33:29 <timeless> ... people would write them, submit them
17:33:34 <timeless> ... but they'd get stuck there
17:33:40 <timeless> ... if you're interested in helping review tests
17:34:00 <timeless> ... writing tests is difficult if you're not familiar w/ the proces
17:34:03 <timeless> s/proces/process/
17:34:08 <ArtB> zakim, code?
17:34:08 <Zakim> the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), ArtB
17:34:11 <timeless> ... but reviewing them is a good way to start
17:34:16 <timeless> ... we have w3c-test.org
17:34:22 <timeless> ... it has a web platform test subdirectory
17:34:48 <timeless> ... for HTML, see we have a breakdown
17:35:33 <darobin> http://w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/master/tools/coverage/?algos=2&assume-idl=85&assume-tooling=50&idl=5&level=1&propdef=8&reftest-factor=2&review-success=50&review-time=30&rfc2119=4&sort-by=id&spec=html&test-time=60
17:35:38 <Zakim> +Art_Barstow
17:35:53 <timeless> foliet: where is the Accessibility section?
17:35:53 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
17:35:58 <timeless> darobin: this is html
17:36:06 <timeless> ... w3c has a fellow on loan from Facebook
17:36:08 <timeless> ... tobie
17:36:10 <chaals> ->  http://w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/ Web Platform Tests
17:36:20 <timeless> ... and they're working on figuring out how to make the accessibility testing side work
17:36:39 <timeless> ... accessibility testing is harder to make automatable
17:36:46 <timeless> ... they're considering Web Driver
17:36:52 <timeless> foliet: there's a community of driven people
17:37:03 <plh> q+
17:37:05 <timeless> ... we could put Brawn instead
17:37:15 <timeless> darobin: we're in the process of raising funds
17:37:26 <timeless> ... and trying to develop tools, to do test running, result gathering, analysis, etc.
17:37:34 <timeless> ... for manual tests, we have a prototype, we're not happy w/ it
17:37:42 <timeless> ... i wouldn't want to launch a big crowd sourcing on it now
17:37:53 <timeless> ... they'd give up on it within a day
17:38:00 <timeless> ... for CSS, there are plenty of things you can't automate
17:38:05 <plh> q-
17:38:07 <timeless> ... we want to push a crowd-sourcing effort
17:38:10 <timeless> ... no timeline for that
17:38:12 <timeless> ... plh ?
17:38:20 <timeless> plh: we're going to develop the infrastructure
17:38:35 <timeless> ... i don't think we'll be in a position to push for crowd-sourcing w/in 6 months
17:38:41 <timeless> ... and it's hard to align with a timeline
17:38:52 <timeless> ... i can't rely on crowd-sourcing if i need to deliver by 2014
17:39:01 <timeless> darobin: you were talking about crowd-sourcing writing of tests
17:39:08 <timeless> ... but foliet was talking about crowd-sourcing running
17:39:23 <timeless> foliet: we have a strong community, both professional and volunteer
17:39:28 <timeless> ... who'd be able to run tests
17:39:38 <timeless> plh: for long term, we'd like to rely on Driver
17:39:47 <timeless> ... i don't think we'll rely on it before next year
17:39:55 <timeless> darobin: Accessibility testing is definitely part of it
17:40:22 <timeless> plh: when we test <track> or [Media].mediagroup, it would be part of that
17:40:32 <timeless> darobin: to give you a sense of the size of the Test Suite
17:40:36 <timeless> ... we have over 10,000 tests
17:40:38 <chaals> [/me wonders about webdriver running accessibility tools that are not built into browsers - but not sure that's a critical thing to say here]
17:40:40 <timeless> ... we want 26,000
17:41:02 <timeless> paulc: from my point of view, this is going at it ass-backwards
17:41:11 <timeless> ... HTML5 WG went into CR w/ a passive exit critera
17:41:19 <timeless> s/critera/criteria/
17:41:27 <timeless> ... that we don't need to test things if we claim we have interop
17:41:39 <timeless> ... we have a grant to not to write tests
17:41:53 <timeless> ... i understand there's a wide desire to have a broad test suite for the platform
17:42:00 <timeless> ... our job in this WG is to get out of CR
17:42:12 <timeless> ... if we believe we have compat in an area, then we don't need tests there
17:42:20 <timeless> ... this is creating a higher mountain than we have to climb
17:42:25 <timeless> darobin: there are 2 things
17:42:32 <timeless> ... `the test suite we need to exit criteria`
17:42:34 <timeless> paulc: no
17:42:42 <timeless> ... we need test results
17:42:58 <timeless> ... you don't need a test suite to get out of CR
17:43:06 <timeless> ... you need interop proof that the director will accept
17:43:14 <timeless> ... this WG went into CR w/ another way to do that as well
17:43:24 <timeless> ... "if we can identify parts of the spec that are broadly implemented
17:43:30 <timeless> ... by implementations out there
17:43:37 <timeless> ... then we don't need a test suite for that"
17:43:46 <timeless> darobin: we would need 8.5 years to finish this
17:43:53 <timeless> ... i don't think our goal is to exit CR in 2021
17:44:03 <timeless> ... which is why, within the context of exiting CR for the HTML WG
17:44:09 <timeless> ... there's a subset we need to target
17:44:16 <timeless> ... we don't need 100% in all these boxes
17:44:24 <timeless> ... it's important to have syntax, and some other things
17:44:28 <timeless> ... but we need to prioritize
17:44:43 <timeless> ... figure out which areas we feel definitely need a test suite to demonstrate interoperability
17:44:47 <krisk> q+
17:44:54 <timeless> ... i don't think we can go to the Directory and say we don't have any tests
17:44:56 <bryan> q+
17:45:02 <timeless> ... this group needs to decide as a group which to work on
17:45:19 <timeless> ... we have 6000 tests waiting for review
17:45:27 <timeless> ... testing for Video, Track, things we know are new
17:45:51 <timeless> mjs: it makes sense to prioritize the tests
17:46:01 <timeless> ... stating the criteria as the new features that need tests
17:46:04 <timeless> ... isn't the right reason
17:46:21 <timeless> ... <video> is possibly not what we need tests for
17:46:26 <timeless> ... we have lots of real world consumers
17:46:34 <tantek> tantek has joined #html-wg
17:46:37 <timeless> ... whereas microdata has less use, or older elements
17:46:42 <timeless> ... even though they've been around forever
17:46:56 <timeless> ... e.g. if they were loosely defined before and are now strongly defined
17:47:14 <timeless> ... we should ask "do we have some reason other than a test suite to decide if something is strongly interoperable"
17:47:16 <timeless> ack krisk
17:47:32 <glenn_> q+
17:48:02 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
17:48:09 <timeless> [ laughter re using microphone ]
17:48:17 <timeless> krisk: master branch has WebGL and other stuff
17:48:23 <timeless> ... really concerned we're losing focus
17:48:29 <timeless> ... there's a CR branch that hasn't had updates in month
17:48:34 <timeless> ... there's tons of action in master
17:48:45 <timeless> ... there's tons of tests in master branch for canvas, but they don't work
17:48:50 <timeless> ... the tests in CR branch work
17:49:13 <timeless> ... in concerned about how this test suite which will last for many years converges w/ our plan to get the spec to REC
17:49:24 <timeless> darobin: i agree
17:49:28 <timeless> ... the html testing TF
17:49:33 <timeless> ... should focus on getting to REC
17:49:42 <timeless> ... contributing to the broader thing, but not getting lost in it completely
17:49:50 <timeless> ... i wasn't aware the canvas test suite was broken
17:49:58 <timeless> krisk: testing wants stuff to be automated
17:50:09 <timeless> ... we made canvas automated w/ TestHarness.s
17:50:21 <timeless> s/TestHarness.s/TestHarness.js/
17:50:24 <timeless> ... but we're churning it
17:50:28 <timeless> darobin: you should raise a bug on that
17:50:38 <timeless> ... we are saving time by making them automatable
17:50:56 <timeless> krisk: if we're just trying to say that <canvas> works and we're done
17:51:01 <CyrilRa> silence
17:51:07 <timeless> MikeSmith: ms2ger made automation for <canvas> testing
17:51:12 <timeless> q?
17:51:32 <krisk> Here is an example http://www.w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/master/2dcontext/path-objects/2d.path.arc.angle.5.html
17:51:32 <timeless> [ paulc will carry mic around for the next half hour ]
17:51:33 <rubys> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-exit-criteria.html
17:51:35 <timeless> ack bryan
17:51:41 <timeless> bryan: we should clarify focus on the spec
17:51:44 <krisk> This is in the master branch (doesn't work)
17:51:46 <timeless> ... which section needs tests
17:51:52 <MikeSmith> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:51:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
17:51:57 <timeless> ... that would help `ben` go through the spec
17:52:02 <timeless> ... to decide which parts need testing
17:52:09 <timeless> ... there's a need to get down to the next level
17:52:11 <krisk> In the CR it's working http://www.w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/CR/canvas2d/path-objects/2d.path.arc.angle.5.html
17:52:18 <timeless> ... we'd like to focus the test writing
17:52:26 <timeless> ... which parts we should be writing tests
17:52:36 <timeless> ... which sections will have this `informal exit criteria`
17:52:54 <timeless> [ paulc projects http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-exit-criteria.html ]
17:53:00 <timeless> paulc: this is the exit criteria
17:53:04 <JF> s/`ben`/Bin (Hu)
17:53:13 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
17:53:14 <timeless> "For features that are well known to be widely implemented and deployed, and where implementations are believed to match the specification, the Working Group will assume effective real-world interoperability without testing."
17:53:21 <timeless> paulc: i want this WG to start identifying those sections
17:53:33 <timeless> ... instead of building a massive infrastructure for html5
17:53:35 <CyrilRa> mic
17:53:49 <timeless> ... that will identify which in that bar graph need testing
17:54:00 <timeless> paulc: i was reading the text from the judgement level
17:54:07 <timeless> ... i'd like us to spend some time at this meeting
17:54:14 <chaals> [+1]
17:54:16 <timeless> ... w/ the ToC of HTML5 and Canvas
17:54:21 <timeless> ... Accessibility
17:54:29 <timeless> ... mjs, i'll pile on on Video
17:54:42 <timeless> ... but someone will put up a hand "in section .2 there's this feature i tried the other day"
17:54:50 <timeless> ... ah, ok, now we're getting the exception list
17:54:57 <timeless> ... to tell the testing people "we need a test there"
17:55:01 <timeless> ... i don't care what they do
17:55:08 <timeless> ... but we need the interoperability results
17:55:18 <timeless> ... "here's a test, MS, you don't do this the same way as Google
17:55:28 <timeless> ... we need to figure out if the spec is wrong, if you're wrong, if they're wrong
17:55:32 <timeless> ... of if something else is wrong"
17:55:43 <timeless> ... i agree w/ darobin, we won't get to the humongous test suite in time
17:55:48 <timeless> ... w/ the task ahead of us
17:55:57 <glenn_> q-
17:56:00 <timeless> darobin: we [w3] will get to the humongous pile, but not this group
17:56:09 <timeless> ... there's another group that wants to do that, but not this group
17:56:19 <timeless> ... the two are related, which is why i wanted to present the context
17:56:21 <timeless> q+ tantek
17:56:26 <chaals> q+ tantek
17:56:38 <timeless> tantek: Tantek Celik, Mozilla
17:56:38 <plh> --> http://www.w3.org/2013/04/test_plan2.html W3C open Web Platform testing plan
17:56:44 <timeless> ack ta
17:56:54 <mjs> q+
17:56:57 <timeless> tantek: there were large parts of CSS we thought were widely deployed and interop
17:57:02 <timeless> ... e.g. Margin collapsing
17:57:06 <timeless> ... in CSS1
17:57:16 <timeless> ... while developing the test suite for CSS2.1
17:57:27 <timeless> ... we thought things were widely implemented and deployed
17:57:36 <timeless> ... unless you think browsers are better implemented than CSS
17:57:43 <timeless> ... i'd challenge the assertion than the belief
17:57:43 <chaals> q+ krisk
17:57:43 <MikeSmith> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:57:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
17:57:49 <timeless> ack krisk
17:58:02 <timeless> krisk: thanks mjs (for yielding)
17:58:06 <timeless> ... back to darobin 's report
17:58:10 <rubys> q+
17:58:12 <timeless> ... going from the spec, section by section
17:58:18 <timeless> ... some are "this is just a definition"
17:58:27 <timeless> darobin: this has been updated since the first version
17:58:39 <timeless> krisk: in "infrastructure", there are a bunch of definitions
17:58:43 <timeless> ... a good thing to recognize
17:58:44 <plh> q+
17:58:50 <davidb_> davidb_ has joined #html-wg
17:58:51 <timeless> ack mjs
17:58:57 <timeless> mjs: the point i'd like to make is thatr
17:58:59 <timeless> s/thatr/that/
17:59:02 <timeless> ... as the w3 process is set up
17:59:06 <timeless> ... getting to the REC stage
17:59:13 <timeless> ... the final stage of the process
17:59:13 <chaals> q+
17:59:15 <JonathanJ3> JonathanJ3 has joined #html-wg
17:59:22 <timeless> ... has a couple of different purposes, w/ different goals
17:59:29 <timeless> ... 1. is test suite driven and interoperable
17:59:29 <plh> q- later
17:59:38 <timeless> ... 2. is to prove that a specification is truly ready and should be referenced
17:59:46 <timeless> ... 3. is the w3c patent policy starts applying
17:59:58 <timeless> ... until that point, the policy is at best informal
18:00:04 <timeless> ... this leads to a tension
18:00:09 <timeless> ... between wanting interop
18:00:20 <timeless> .. and wanting the patent policy and getting people to "use this thing"
18:00:23 <timeless> s/../.../
18:00:33 <timeless> ... part of the reason for the informal interop bit
18:00:42 <timeless> ... is to allow for the second to parts
18:00:52 <timeless> ... i don't want to downplay making a comprehensive test suite
18:01:03 <timeless> ... but it does make sense to prioritize portions for the test suite
18:01:10 <timeless> ... even though i agree on roughly interoperable bits
18:01:16 <timeless> ... there are bits that are slightly complicated
18:01:24 <rubys> q-
18:01:34 <timeless> ... saying "html5 is so much better than html4" is worth doing
18:01:38 <timeless> ... and not waiting too long
18:01:51 <timeless> paulc: darobin, if this WG could identify areas that need testing, that would be useful
18:01:53 <timeless> darobin: yes
18:01:55 <bryan> +1
18:02:02 <timeless> paulc: and areas where this group doesn't think need testing
18:02:04 <timeless> ... that would be useful
18:02:38 <tantek> tantek has joined #html-wg
18:03:08 <timeless> ... and work to identify qualitatively, interoperable, independent, implementations and judgement level
18:03:24 <plh> q?
18:03:30 <Travis> q+
18:03:36 <plh> ack chaals
18:03:36 <timeless> ack chaals
18:03:45 <timeless> chaals: what mjs said, we think it's important to ship this spec
18:03:53 <timeless> ... we expect we'll find more bugs
18:04:00 <timeless> ... we will want to improve stuff
18:04:02 <timeless> ack plh
18:04:03 <plh> --> http://www.w3.org/2013/04/test_plan2.html W3C open Web Platform testing plan
18:04:39 <timeless> plh: the test goal of this WG is different than the other test group
18:04:45 <timeless> ... a point i made to the testing team
18:04:55 <timeless> ... is that the HTML WG testing group will go for the minimum
18:04:59 <timeless> ... the goals are different
18:05:09 <timeless> ... even if the goal of the testing project is valuable
18:05:16 <timeless> ... to push HTML5 to CR
18:05:36 <joesteele> joesteele has joined #html-wg
18:05:38 <timeless> ... i pasted a link by tobie for what we think for the testing project
18:05:52 <timeless> ... it's what we sent to our ...
18:05:57 <timeless> ... people are welcome to provide feedback
18:06:05 <timeless> ... this is wider than the scope of the HTML WG
18:06:07 <timeless> q?
18:06:23 <plh> ack Travis
18:06:32 <timeless> Travis: the chart is good
18:06:44 <timeless> ... now we're trying to transition to defining what the WG needs to do for testing
18:06:53 <timeless> ... i'd like to focus the quantitative bits on our goals
18:07:17 <timeless> paulc: this topic isn't over
18:07:31 <timeless> ... i'd like us to seriously consider using the time we have tomorrow
18:07:37 <timeless> ... to use qualitative judgement
18:07:50 <timeless> ... not sure if we should do it as the group as a whole, or crowd-sourcing (breaking up into smaller groups)
18:07:57 <timeless> ... you should expect we'll spend some time tomorrow
18:08:09 <timeless> paulc: i'll return to the agenda
18:08:25 <timeless> Topic: Usage of Github and branching (Kris)
18:08:34 <timeless> paulc: did you make your point?
18:09:18 <timeless> krisk: the effort gone
18:09:24 <chaals> q+
18:09:28 <timeless> ... into setting this up in github, could go on forever
18:09:34 <timeless> ... is that where the CR branch come into play?
18:09:36 <timeless> darobin: yes
18:09:42 <timeless> krisk: so all changes there?
18:09:43 <timeless> darobin: no
18:09:49 <timeless> darobin: github repo has 2 branches
18:09:51 <timeless> ... 1. master
18:09:54 <timeless> ... 2. cr branch
18:09:59 <timeless> ... - designed as a subbranch
18:10:09 <timeless> s/master/master - where everything goes first/
18:10:25 <timeless> ... people interested in maintaining cr cherrypick
18:10:33 <timeless> paulc: does that apply to Canvas and others?
18:10:39 <timeless> darobin: yes
18:10:41 <timeless> krisk: also for webapps?
18:10:49 <timeless> darobin: idea was webapps would do the same thing
18:10:54 <timeless> ... but not our problem at all
18:10:57 <timeless> krisk: for a day or two
18:11:10 <timeless> chaals: we're following the html wg down the github rabbit hole
18:11:14 <acolwell_> acolwell_ has joined #html-wg
18:11:15 <timeless> ack chaals
18:11:24 <timeless> chaals: w3 signed up for a decade long project
18:11:27 <timeless> ... w/ github
18:11:37 <timeless> ... you're committed to making sure it stays alive?
18:12:01 <timeless> darobin: we're committed
18:12:04 <plh> q?
18:12:17 <timeless> krisk: the master branch
18:12:21 <timeless> ... e.g. for canvas
18:12:43 <timeless> ... wanting to avoid unnecessary churn
18:13:09 <timeless> paulc: who is the person responsible for the cr branch in github?
18:13:14 <timeless> darobin: probably me
18:13:21 <timeless> paulc: you, or the testing tf, or ?
18:13:28 <timeless> krisk: anyone part of w3 w/ pull privs can
18:13:33 <JonathanJ> JonathanJ has joined #html-wg
18:13:45 <timeless> darobin: so far we've been working on the assumption that anyone willing to do work was welcome to do the work
18:13:50 <timeless> ... i was working on CR, but i haven't in a while
18:14:01 <timeless> ... but we don't have someone specifically responsible
18:14:06 <timeless> krisk: the TF could
18:14:16 <timeless> ... changes at TPAC, and moving to github
18:14:19 <timeless> ... html needs to move forward
18:14:25 <timeless> paulc: what about test results?
18:14:31 <timeless> ... if i'm an indivual
18:14:34 <timeless> ... or a company
18:14:40 <timeless> ... and trying to decide if i want to use the tests
18:14:44 <timeless> ... what's the setup to using the tests?
18:15:08 <timeless> darobin: if you go to w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/ there's a way to run the test suite
18:15:22 <timeless> ... you can check out the test suite
18:15:34 <timeless> ... we'd like implementors to use the test suite directly in their CI systems
18:16:10 <timeless> krisk: it's in github, but it's synced to w3c-test.org
18:16:23 <timeless> paulc: so i load this, and click this, and click this
18:16:23 <JonathanJ> rrsagent, draft minutes
18:16:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html JonathanJ
18:16:27 <timeless> krisk: and you click a .html file
18:16:32 <timeless> ... "you passed!"
18:16:40 <timeless> darobin: it's missing straightforward navigation
18:16:54 <timeless> ... great browser, it supports document.title
18:17:15 <JonathanJ> Present+ Jonghong_Jeon
18:17:24 <timeless> paulc: on criteria in exit criteria
18:17:34 <timeless> ... the exit criteria testing requirements need to be publicly available
18:17:45 <chaals> -
18:17:46 <timeless> ... w/o that, crowd-sourcing wouldn't be possible
18:17:51 <timeless> s/-//
18:17:51 <chaals> q-
18:17:51 <timeless> s/-//
18:17:55 <timeless> s/-//
18:18:04 <timeless> s/crowd/crowd-/
18:18:21 <timeless> paulc: i've been in groups where the interop requirements were confidential
18:18:31 <timeless> ... krisk any points on github/branching?
18:18:37 <timeless> krisk: action to make sure that it's clear
18:18:48 <timeless> ... what's to do
18:19:09 <timeless> paulc: action on Testing TF to make organization of github test suite is documented and clear?
18:19:12 <timeless> krisk: correct
18:19:16 <rubys> action on krisk make sure that the organizational structure of github test suite is well documented
18:19:16 <trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/users>.
18:19:50 <timeless> paulc: let's skip: Review of which parts of HTML5 pass the "passive exit criteria"
18:20:04 <timeless> Topic: Status of HTML 5.1 and Canvas open bugs
18:20:04 <rubys> action: krisk to make sure that the organizational structure of github test suite is well documented
18:20:04 <trackbot> Error finding 'krisk'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/users>.
18:20:07 <chaals> q+ to raise the question of testing beyond the browser implementations
18:20:19 <aizu_> aizu_ has joined #html-wg
18:20:35 <rubys> http://intertwingly.net/tmp/wgtrends.cgi
18:20:50 <timeless> s|Topic: Status of HTML 5.1 and Canvas open bugs||
18:20:51 <rubys> http://intertwingly.net/tmp/wgstatus.html
18:20:52 <timeless> ack chaals
18:20:52 <Zakim> chaals, you wanted to raise the question of testing beyond the browser implementations
18:20:59 <timeless> chaals: there's testing for browsers
18:21:02 <timeless> ... but browsers are not the web
18:21:06 <timeless> ... there's one of the pieces of the web
18:21:11 <timeless> ... people need to create stuff
18:21:17 <timeless> ... i don't see that all in the plan
18:21:21 <timeless> ... that seems like a failure
18:21:33 <timeless> ... quite happy w/ "testing of can you do this is anecdotal"
18:21:46 <timeless> ... saying "browsers will implement this code as specified"
18:21:55 <timeless> ... without saying "people will produce it as specified"
18:21:58 <timeless> ... is a problem
18:22:04 <timeless> paulc: how would we tackle this problem?
18:22:15 <timeless> ... if you made this point when we were discussing our exit criteria
18:22:22 <timeless> ... would we have changed them?
18:22:27 <timeless> chaals: i did raise it then
18:22:29 <timeless> [ laughter ]
18:22:38 <rubys> action: on Kris Krueger to make sure that the organizational structure of github test suite is well documented
18:22:38 <trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/users>.
18:22:38 <timeless> chaals: it's about also looking at authoring systems and usage workflows
18:22:41 <timeless> ... everything has been done
18:22:55 <tantek> tantek has joined #html-wg
18:22:55 <rubys> action: Kris Krueger to make sure that the organizational structure of github test suite is well documented
18:22:55 <trackbot> Created ACTION-226 - Krueger to make sure that the organizational structure of github test suite is well documented [on Kris Krueger - due 2013-04-30].
18:23:20 <Zakim> -Art_Barstow
18:23:37 <timeless> chaals: i'll type a comment
18:25:55 <chaals> chaals: We have a lot of testing oriented toward browsers. But (like accessibility testing that goes beyond "simple" browsers) we haven't talked about other parts of the infrastructure - processing systems, authoring systems, content management and maintenance tools. If these don't produce what is in the spec, it doesn't matter what browsers do since they won't be processing that kind of content
18:26:30 <chaals> ... so I think it is important that we remember the rest of teh infrastructure in testing
18:26:52 <timeless> Topic: Status of HTML 5.1 and Canvas open bugs
18:26:57 <timeless> paulc: microdata fell steeply
18:26:57 <timeless> darobin: looks steep, but it fell from 9 to 1
18:26:57 <timeless> paulc: when we appointed the editorial team last fall
18:26:57 <timeless> ... we had 480 bugs
18:26:57 <timeless> ... i think the editorial team quickly got rid of the spam
18:26:57 <timeless> ... when people typed the home row
18:26:58 <timeless> ... down to 420
18:26:58 <timeless> ... and since then, we're down to less than half
18:27:13 <timeless> ... we still have a bunch of important bugs
18:27:13 <timeless> ... bugs that might impact HTML5 or Canvas CR
18:27:21 <timeless> ... not clear what the situation is
18:27:26 <timeless> ... we need a downward trend
18:27:36 <timeless> ... and editors need to understand how to balance editing and fixing bugs
18:27:39 <timeless> ... darobin ?
18:27:39 <chaals> zakim, who is on the phone?
18:27:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see CyrilRa, Paypal
18:27:43 <timeless> darobin: thinking about that
18:27:56 <timeless> ... want to go through the buglist and mark absolutely must be fixed for CR
18:28:03 <timeless> paulc: maybe it'd be useful if you did that
18:28:12 <timeless> ... we could add another histogram of that
18:28:21 <timeless> ... to see our flight path of zero bugs to cr
18:28:53 <rubys> action: robin to give us a clear indication as to which html5 bugs apply to CR due in one month
18:28:53 <trackbot> Created ACTION-227 - Give us a clear indication as to which html5 bugs apply to CR due in one month [on Robin Berjon - due 2013-04-30].
18:28:54 <timeless> ... let's do that, on darobin on behalf of the editorial team
18:29:03 <timeless> ... and on the canvas editors?
18:29:11 <timeless> cabanier: i think there are like 6
18:29:17 <timeless> paulc: should be very easy
18:29:29 <timeless> cabanier: i think they're all for the next version
18:29:33 <timeless> ... there's one we're going to remove
18:29:39 <timeless> ... hit regions, that changes an example
18:29:47 <timeless> paulc: darobin if we can get that in the next month
18:29:51 <timeless> darobin: yeah yeah
18:30:00 <timeless> paulc: also, based on the editor's meeting
18:30:10 <timeless> ... it isn't appropriate for someone to file a bug and wait 6 months for a response from the editors
18:30:15 <timeless> ... someone needs to triage incoming bugs
18:30:18 <chaals> i/Topic: Status/[The search engine and other processing implementations of microdata are an example of important but non-browser implementations, and on the other side so are code generators which actually create microdata e.g. for schema.org]
18:30:20 <timeless> ... comments from editors?
18:30:36 <timeless> Topic: Status of Features at Risk (more, less?)
18:30:46 <timeless> paulc: suggested at last week's WG meeting
18:30:53 <timeless> ... that we might look at Features AT RISK
18:31:36 <timeless> paulc: this is the status section from the html draft
18:32:08 <timeless> ... looking at this
18:32:09 <glenn_> <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id="status-of-this-document">Status of This document</h2>
18:32:12 <timeless> ... there's a lot of history here
18:32:18 <timeless> ... anyone have comments on these items?
18:32:33 <timeless> ... App Cache was added AT RISK because of talk of an App Cache v2
18:32:40 <timeless> ... I believe from TPAC was that this would be done in WebApps
18:32:45 <timeless> ... chairs had an offline discussion
18:32:58 <timeless> ... chaals, i don't think you got yourselves suitably rechartered
18:32:58 <glenn_> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/#status-of-this-document
18:33:07 <timeless> chaals: we believe that work is covered by our existing charter
18:33:13 <timeless> ... we'll check again
18:33:18 <timeless> ... if it isn't, we'll recharter
18:33:28 <timeless> darobin: WebApps has a "get out of jail for free"
18:33:32 <timeless> chaals: it isn't free
18:33:39 <timeless> darobin: simply by notifying AC
18:33:44 <timeless> chaals: a bit more complex than that
18:33:56 <timeless> darobin: to take things that were worked on by HTML
18:34:02 <timeless> chaals: it's an admin discussion
18:34:07 <timeless> ... between chairs and w3 and AC
18:34:17 <timeless> paulc: will you discuss AppCache v2 this week?
18:34:18 <timeless> chaals: yes
18:34:26 <timeless> paulc: what did we do about <hgroup>?
18:34:30 <timeless> chaals: it got kicked out
18:34:39 <timeless> paulc: anything else to take out
18:34:42 <timeless> plh: or add to the list
18:35:00 <timeless> paulc: not sure how to add to a CR at risk list
18:35:11 <timeless> rubys: we seem to think that API for Microdata is at risk
18:35:23 <timeless> darobin: it's in microdata
18:35:39 <timeless> paulc: anyone know what the cite= / bug 18915 thing is?
18:35:54 <timeless> mjs: spec has a requirement that if you use cite= that the UA has to have a way to get to the url
18:35:59 <timeless> ... great wishlist, but never implemented
18:36:09 <timeless> chaals: implemented in rare places, but yeah
18:36:10 <MikeSmith> q+ to ask if we talked about style@scoped
18:36:20 <timeless> paulc: not seeing further actions
18:36:24 <timeless> ack MikeSmith
18:36:24 <Zakim> MikeSmith, you wanted to ask if we talked about style@scoped
18:36:56 <timeless> MikeSmith: we have two style@scoped implementations
18:37:03 <timeless> paulc: i'll ask darobin and the editorial team
18:37:11 <timeless> ... we're talking about heartbeat documents for 5.1
18:37:21 <timeless> ... do the editors think it would make sense to publish a heartbeat of the CR?
18:37:23 <timeless> darobin: we could
18:37:29 <timeless> ... not sure if there would be extreme value in it
18:37:51 <timeless> paulc: if we did a heartbeat, then it would be useful to update the status
18:38:05 <timeless> ... to note that it's unlikely for the feature to be dropped because we saw implementations
18:38:13 <timeless> ... what would cause us to do a heartbeat for the CR?
18:38:19 <timeless> chaals: a handful of important changes
18:38:24 <timeless> ... taking <hgroup> out of the spec
18:38:46 <timeless> ... @ Yandex, after they struggled through the badly written English in Russian
18:38:54 <timeless> ... and then told them that it changed
18:39:05 <timeless> paulc: we have dropping <hgroup> and adding <main>
18:39:16 <timeless> ... anyone in the group who think that's enough to trigger a heartbeat?
18:39:24 <timeless> chaals: what's the cost of a heartbeat?
18:39:31 <timeless> darobin: grumpy editors
18:39:35 <timeless> tantek: question i'd ask
18:39:45 <timeless> ... is any features that were dropped or changed were at-risk?
18:39:57 <timeless> ... if they were at-risk, then i'd see no problem w/ a heartbeat
18:40:10 <timeless> paulc: <hgroup> was at risk
18:40:13 <timeless> ... but <main> was added
18:40:21 <timeless> ... we know we're going back to LC
18:40:27 <timeless> ... <main> is in 5.1,
18:40:32 <timeless> ... we're folding 5.0
18:40:43 <timeless> ... but we were going to publish a NOTE
18:40:55 <timeless> ... but plan 2014 permitted extensions to be folded in
18:41:08 <timeless> q?
18:41:12 <timeless> q+ tantek
18:41:23 <timeless> glenn_: what do you mean heartbeat of a CR?
18:41:25 <timeless> ... a new CR?
18:41:29 <timeless> ... experience in other WGs
18:41:39 <timeless> ... if you make a substantive change, you need a new CR, doesn't mean going to LC
18:41:46 <timeless> ack
18:41:49 <timeless> s/ack//
18:41:51 <timeless> ack t
18:42:01 <timeless> tantek: my preference is to issue a new CR
18:42:08 <timeless> ... i don't think that's supported by the CR process
18:42:46 <timeless> paulc: we've issued WDs saying they were updated versions of CRs in other WGs
18:42:52 <timeless> chaals: i'm working on the process document
18:42:59 <timeless> ... tantek, your point is noted
18:43:21 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:43:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
18:43:59 <timeless> glenn_: changes sylvia has made for Text Track
18:44:17 <timeless> paulc: were those changes in 5.0 or 5.1?
18:44:23 <timeless> glenn_: one specific change was made to 5.0
18:44:27 <timeless> ... most changes were in 5.1
18:44:38 <timeless> ... one of the changes was going to be backwards incompatible
18:44:44 <timeless> ... so she made one change to 5.0
18:45:03 <timeless> paulc: where / when was this discussion?
18:45:09 <timeless> s/sylvia/Silvia/
18:45:10 <wonsuk> wonsuk has joined #html-wg
18:45:26 <timeless> Chair: paulc, rubys
18:45:40 <timeless> paulc: Silvia was trying to abstract out of the extension spec
18:45:48 <timeless> s/of/to/
18:45:49 <plh> one can udpate a CR
18:45:54 <plh> the Process allows that
18:45:55 <timeless> ... the portion for captioning
18:46:29 <timeless> Janina: longdesc is obsolete in CR
18:46:34 <timeless> ... what's the status?
18:46:36 <timeless> darobin: we have an open bug
18:46:39 <timeless> ... i haven't removed yet
18:46:43 <timeless> ... but i will, it will happen
18:46:48 <timeless> paulc: another change to CR?
18:46:50 <timeless> darobin: yes
18:46:55 <timeless> paulc: thank you janina
18:47:06 <glenn_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Apr/0063.html
18:47:06 <timeless> ... people said earlier, their bar would be different by kind
18:47:21 <timeless> darobin: this is moving a had to be supported out of obsolete
18:47:30 <timeless> paulc: isn't that what Silvia's proposal was as well?
18:47:32 <timeless> darobin: possibly
18:47:55 <glenn_> glenn: see above link regarding possible change (or need to change) html5.0 re: WebVTT features
18:48:14 <timeless> Topic: Moving Image Description Extension to Last Call and plans for re-integration with HTML 5.0 (A11Y TF) [longdesc]
18:48:20 <timeless> chaals: we have this spec
18:48:30 <timeless> ... the spec is HTML Community Description Extension
18:48:35 <timeless> ... we have FPWD
18:48:40 <timeless> ... we've described longdesc
18:48:46 <timeless> ... we have outstanding
18:48:48 <timeless> ... we expect to go to LC
18:48:50 <JonathanJ3> JonathanJ3 has joined #html-wg
18:48:54 <timeless> janina: June 11
18:49:06 <timeless> chaals: the thing according to the timeline of the patent policy
18:49:17 <timeless> ... we expect 150 days after FPWD, that we'll be done
18:49:28 <timeless> ... the question of integration into HTML -something- is open
18:49:40 <timeless> ... we haven't had nor sought agreement to integrate into html
18:49:45 <timeless> ... we figured we'd think about that more
18:49:49 <timeless> ... when the spec is actually finished
18:49:55 <timeless> ... when we'd actually gotten all that
18:49:57 <timeless> ... when the thing is ready
18:50:09 <timeless> ... whatever version of HTML is in the timeline in the point of process
18:50:16 <timeless> paulc: re: what Janina brought up
18:50:28 <timeless> ... do you need the change darobin pointed to when you go to LC?
18:50:31 <timeless> chaals: we don't need it
18:50:35 <timeless> ... but we'd like it to be made
18:50:39 <timeless> ... it isn't time critical
18:50:45 <timeless> paulc: just wanted to understand if it's a hard linkage
18:50:47 <timeless> janina: no
18:50:56 <timeless> paulc: do you need help from the WG on the 11 bugs?
18:51:02 <timeless> chaals: yes, i'm supposed to close 9 on thursday
18:51:07 <timeless> ... the way the TF works
18:51:13 <timeless> ... we propose resolutions
18:51:25 <timeless> ... at meetings, w/ a week delay since not everyone goes to meetings
18:51:29 <timeless> ... there are 2 bugs left
18:51:37 <timeless> paulc: when you go to LC
18:51:43 <timeless> ... is that a CfC between PF and HTML WGs?
18:51:46 <timeless> janina: I expect
18:51:48 <timeless> chaals: yes
18:51:59 <timeless> paulc: you're effectively giving a Time Table to the WG and people who read our notes
18:52:03 <timeless> ... that approximately in June
18:52:07 <timeless> ... to see a CfC
18:52:14 <timeless> ... since the TF owns the spec and does the work
18:52:21 <timeless> ... the TF will propose a Draft LC WD
18:52:27 <timeless> ... that would go to PF and HTML WG for CfCs
18:52:37 <timeless> ... and it would be published jointly by the WGs as the extension spec
18:52:48 <timeless> ... is that fair janina?
18:52:51 <timeless> janina: yes
18:53:00 <timeless> paulc: this is an example of Plan 2014 working
18:53:11 <timeless> ... when we first proposed this, a number of people were nervous
18:53:14 <timeless> ... and suspicious
18:53:21 <timeless> ... this is an example of Plan 2014 at its best
18:53:28 <timeless> ... only thing better is if we actually fold it back in
18:53:33 <timeless> chaals: from my perspective, so far so good
18:53:36 <timeless> janina: +1
18:53:50 <timeless> paulc: experience as chair, best thing to do is recess/adjourn early
18:53:56 <timeless> rubys: lunch is out there
18:54:07 <timeless> paulc: please gather before 1pm
18:54:14 <timeless> ... topic will be MSE
18:54:17 <timeless> [ Lunch ]
18:54:27 <timeless> topic: Media Source Extensions (MSE) (Media TF)
19:00:53 <Zakim> -CyrilRa
19:06:21 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
19:09:15 <gitbot> gitbot has joined #html-wg
19:09:15 <gitbot> 01[13html01] 15rubys pushed 1 new commit to 06feature/whatwg: 02https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/03feebf25072ba37ee7095da756a8641b920f51f
19:09:15 <gitbot> 13html/06feature/whatwg 1403feebf 15ianh: [giow] (0) ImageData objects now expose an explicit pixel density, enabling them to be converted to BitmapImage objects correctly....
19:09:15 <gitbot> gitbot has left #html-wg
19:12:59 <yoav_> yoav_ has joined #html-wg
19:16:53 <SteveF> SteveF has joined #html-wg
19:17:05 <SteveF> MikeSmith: http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/W3C-WHATWG-Differences
19:27:18 <yoav_> yoav_ has joined #html-wg
19:34:43 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
19:34:54 <JonathanJ> JonathanJ has joined #html-wg
19:36:45 <gitbot> gitbot has joined #html-wg
19:36:45 <gitbot> 01[13html01] 15stevefaulkner pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/w3c/html/compare/dab1a6912807...dd337bd21b90
19:36:45 <gitbot> 13html/06master 1418097b2 15steve faulkner: tweaked aria-valuetext translatable conditions
19:36:45 <gitbot> 13html/06master 14dd337bd 15steve faulkner: Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/w3c/html
19:36:45 <gitbot> gitbot has left #html-wg
19:43:20 <ddorwin> ddorwin has joined #html-wg
19:53:23 <edoyle> edoyle has joined #html-wg
19:57:27 <cabanier> cabanier has joined #html-wg
19:58:59 <jeff> jeff has joined #html-wg
20:00:30 <CyrilRa> CyrilRa has joined #html-wg
20:00:36 <CyrilRa> CyrilRa has left #html-wg
20:00:59 <eliot> eliot has joined #html-wg
20:01:27 <aizu> aizu has joined #html-wg
20:01:47 <Zakim> +CyrilRa
20:01:56 <CyrilRa> CyrilRa has joined #html-wg
20:02:12 <plh> plh has joined #html-wg
20:04:24 <Jungkee> Jungkee has joined #html-wg
20:04:31 <timeless> paulc: in HTML WG, we have a Media TF that's working on MSE and EME
20:04:31 <timeless> ... at TPAC last fall, we spent probably 2 hours going over individual bugs
20:04:31 <timeless> ... I humorously commented that Google was telling Netflix how to build their service
20:04:31 <timeless> ... and Netflix was telling Google how to build their browser
20:04:31 <timeless> ... I got feedback that we had made good progress
20:04:42 <timeless> ... we don't have that many bugs
20:05:01 <timeless> Zakim, who is on the phone?
20:05:01 <Zakim> On the phone I see Paypal, CyrilRa
20:05:10 <darobin> darobin has joined #html-wg
20:05:18 <rubys> rubys has joined #html-wg
20:05:20 <markw> markw has joined #html-wg
20:07:05 <paulc> paulc has joined #html-wg
20:07:37 <timeless> paulc: we had a couple of topics
20:07:41 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #html-wg
20:07:41 <timeless> ... open bugs, and getting MSE to LC
20:08:07 <JF_> JF_ has joined #html-wg
20:08:38 <joesteele> joesteele has joined #html-wg
20:09:31 <Travis> Travis has joined #html-wg
20:09:52 <paulc> MSE bugs; http://tinyurl.com/6pdnzej
20:10:04 <timeless> s|MSE bugs; http://tinyurl.com/6pdnzej|-> http://tinyurl.com/6pdnzej MSE bugs|
20:10:15 <timeless> paulc: based on what worked @TPAC in Nov
20:10:22 <timeless> ... my principle is that we step through these bugs
20:10:27 <timeless> ... you tell us what you know about them
20:10:31 <timeless> ... tell me what to do
20:10:49 <wonsuk> wonsuk has joined #html-wg
20:11:04 <acolwell> acolwell has joined #html-wg
20:11:10 <timeless> acolwell: Aaron Colwell, editor of MSE
20:11:27 <timeless> ... bug 20760 - defining interface for quality metrics
20:11:33 <timeless> ... adrianba had a proposal
20:11:36 <timeless> ... this is a subset
20:11:42 <timeless> ... i'm not sure of current status
20:11:46 <timeless> adrianba: we want to discuss this
20:11:54 <JonathanJ> JonathanJ has joined #html-wg
20:12:23 <timeless> adrianba: Adrian Bateman, Microsoft
20:12:39 <timeless> ... we're getting close to agreement here
20:12:43 <timeless> ... couple of minor things
20:12:48 <timeless> ... reflected towards the end
20:13:01 <timeless> ... we proposed a method, rather than an attribute to make it clear you'd get a new object each time
20:13:15 <timeless> ... it's possible that the application could remember the timestamp for when it called the method
20:13:24 <timeless> ... but if there's latency, having the timestamp in the object makes sense
20:13:35 <timeless> ... we want to make sure all the data is from the same time
20:13:44 <timeless> ... not sure whether we think that just this data is sufficient
20:13:53 <timeless> ... it's obviously less than what we originally proposed
20:13:59 <timeless> ... which we thought was a good small subset
20:14:13 <timeless> ... it seems we're heading toward consensus with this limited subset
20:14:22 <timeless> ... if there are problems w/ implementation experience, we can change
20:14:30 <timeless> acolwell: how should we proceed?
20:14:34 <timeless> ... i can live w/ the timestamp
20:14:38 <timeless> ... i don't strongly object
20:14:44 <timeless> ... the framerate i think you can derive
20:14:48 <timeless> ... jitter, i don't know
20:14:57 <timeless> adrianba: i'm fine w/ leaving out those data values for now
20:15:01 <timeless> ... i'd like to see
20:15:10 <timeless> ... do you agree a method conveys more clearly than an attribute?
20:15:24 <timeless> ... i think people assume a value from an attribute they assume it's constant
20:15:36 <timeless> acolwell: i know the `buffered` attribute on a MediaElement says it's a new object each time
20:15:39 <timeless> ... not sure about elsewhere
20:15:49 <timeless> paulc: you said you wanted an object
20:15:55 <timeless> adrianba: i wanted a method to indicate it's a new object
20:16:05 <timeless> acolwell: i was using the MediaElement as an example
20:16:27 <timeless> ... i'll take an action to incorporate those changes into the spec
20:16:44 <paulc> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20760
20:16:58 <arun> arun has joined #html-wg
20:17:08 <timeless> XX: total video frames, how is that?
20:17:17 <timeless> acolwell: originally it was frames before decode
20:17:27 <timeless> ... theoretically displayed
20:17:37 <timeless> XX: these values convey intended framerate and dropped frames
20:17:43 <timeless> ... initially we had a proposal for frame jitter
20:17:47 <timeless> ... how was that resolved?
20:17:56 <timeless> adrianba: feedback so far, we want to make this as simple as possible
20:18:05 <timeless> ... there's agreement on determining frames being dropped
20:18:11 <timeless> ... "how essential to applications is jitter?"
20:18:18 <timeless> ... there doesn't appear to be much support for jitter right now
20:18:20 <gitbot> gitbot has joined #html-wg
20:18:20 <gitbot> 01[13html01] 15stevefaulkner pushed 1 new commit to 06master: 02https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/610e94d71afef8168a155903fb64261c3c0ab3a2
20:18:20 <gitbot> 13html/06master 14610e94d 15steve faulkner: remove hgroup from element list...
20:18:20 <gitbot> gitbot has left #html-wg
20:18:31 <timeless> ... we want to support things where there's consensus
20:18:38 <timeless> ... the question is can we make a case for jitter?
20:18:46 <timeless> acolwell: my concern is was that jitter significant?
20:19:01 <bryan> jitter is an important metric especially in variable network environments
20:19:08 <timeless> ... will people understand which to use
20:19:17 <timeless> paulc: you'll raise adding jitter later?
20:19:19 <timeless> adrianba: rate
20:19:36 <timeless> paulc: and later, we'll open a new bug and point back
20:19:49 <timeless> s/XX/jerry/
20:19:50 <timeless> s/XX/jerry/
20:20:00 <gitbot> gitbot has joined #html-wg
20:20:00 <gitbot> 01[13html01] 15stevefaulkner pushed 1 new commit to 06CR: 02https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/5ebde5b9f609f00548800d882e0d8b346f8d789f
20:20:00 <gitbot> 13html/06CR 145ebde5b 15steve faulkner: remove hgroup from element list...
20:20:00 <gitbot> gitbot has left #html-wg
20:20:13 <timeless> acolwell: adrianba, can we do "out of order" last?
20:20:20 <timeless> paulc: do out of order out of order?
20:20:21 <timeless> adrianba: sure
20:20:27 <paulc> Bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21298
20:20:36 <timeless> acolwell: this is the media primer bug
20:20:44 <timeless> ... i kept it open because they requested a diagram
20:21:00 <timeless> paulc: adrianba, you sent an email
20:21:12 <timeless> ... saying that the TF was requesting chairs do a call for volunteers for a primer for MSE
20:21:17 <timeless> ... i responded saying i'd do that
20:21:19 <timeless> ... i haven't done that
20:21:33 <timeless> acolwell: you were saying this bug would be resolved by someone writing a primer
20:21:38 <timeless> ... i could resolve this as later for the primer
20:21:43 <timeless> ... this shouldn't block getting to LC
20:21:50 <timeless> ... i wanted to see i can get agreement on that
20:21:55 <timeless> paulc: proposal to resolve as LATER
20:22:01 <timeless> ... put it in later, or in a primer
20:22:29 <timeless> ... 21298 is resolved LATER, w/ possibility of inserting diagram later
20:22:32 <paulc> Bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21431
20:22:34 <kliehm> kliehm has joined #html-wg
20:22:40 <timeless> acolwell: i believe this can be resolved
20:22:43 <timeless> ... i'm not an expert
20:22:54 <timeless> ... i believe glenn_ said the preference would be to have a reasonable behavior
20:23:01 <timeless> ... and not have to deal w/ overlapping text tracks
20:23:09 <timeless> ... i believe we can properly handle splicing of text tracks
20:23:15 <timeless> ... assuming we don't have to deal w/ overlapped ones
20:23:22 <timeless> ... the behavior is predictable if you have overlapped
20:23:26 <timeless> ... but it isn't optimal
20:23:30 <timeless> ... i plan to close this bug
20:23:38 <timeless> paulc: how will you resolve this?
20:23:50 <timeless> acolwell: WONTFIX
20:24:11 <timeless> glenn_: does the current text cover text tracks that support/override the behavior?
20:24:13 <timeless> acolwell: it doesn't
20:24:21 <timeless> glenn_: i'd like to see that
20:24:27 <timeless> acolwell: can you provide suggested text and location?
20:24:42 <timeless> paulc: if glenn_ can give a target and non-normative text
20:24:54 <timeless> ... saying that the format of a Text Track might override that
20:25:09 <paulc> Bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21536
20:25:14 <timeless> acolwell: i think adrianba is on the hook to provide text
20:25:21 <timeless> ... this is about origin/data handed to MSE
20:25:29 <timeless> adrianba: we um
20:25:33 <timeless> ... talked about this in the context of
20:25:40 <timeless> ... some of the other origin related questions
20:25:41 <glenn> glenn has joined #html-wg
20:25:44 <timeless> ... there are some aspects of the video
20:25:46 <timeless> ... element
20:25:56 <timeless> ... that depend upon whether or not the source of the data is Same-Origin or not
20:26:13 <timeless> ... since MSE allows applications to append data to data they have access to already, into the media buffer
20:26:18 <timeless> ... that data should be considered same origin
20:26:24 <timeless> ... we think there should be a note in the spec
20:26:38 <timeless> ... to make clear that any operations on the Media element will be considered Same Origin
20:26:42 <timeless> ... and I just need to do the work
20:26:51 <timeless> paulc: sounds like a proposal
20:26:57 <timeless> ... you'll write it up?
20:27:03 <timeless> adrianba: it's assigned to me, i will
20:27:04 <stearns> stearns has joined #html-wg
20:27:10 <timeless> paulc: we're waiting on adrianba to resolve this bug
20:27:13 <timeless> s/to/in order to/
20:27:19 <paulc> Bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21703
20:27:27 <timeless> acolwell: this is non-contentious, i just need to add the text
20:27:47 <timeless> ... I just need to add `unrestricted` and then resolve FIXED
20:27:58 <paulc> Bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21796
20:27:59 <timeless> acolwell: also pretty trivial
20:28:04 <timeless> ... there's an issue box in the spec right now
20:28:14 <timeless> ... "we need to define error codes from append"
20:28:19 <timeless> ... but it isn't clear what we need to return
20:28:41 <timeless> ... we'll remove this until we get implementation experience
20:28:44 <timeless> paulc: so this is LATER?
20:28:55 <timeless> acolwell: no, i need to remove text pending implementation experience
20:29:02 <timeless> adrianba: the spec calls for a Simple Event to be fired
20:29:08 <timeless> ... which has no way to convey additional information
20:29:15 <timeless> ... we included this issue in our original submission
20:29:30 <timeless> ... about thinking about a way to provide additional information about the error
20:29:38 <timeless> ... we got this far w/o finding a need for it
20:29:44 <timeless> ... so we propose to remove it
20:29:58 <timeless> ... the note is asking for consumers to explain what they'd need/why
20:30:09 <timeless> ... right now we just fire an event to say there was an error
20:30:12 <timeless> ... and then we stop
20:30:29 <timeless> acolwell: sometimes the error will be reported via XHR
20:30:45 <timeless> paulc: 21796 will be resolved FIXED by removing the issue box
20:30:53 <paulc> Bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20901
20:31:30 <timeless> adrianba: we talked about this on the call a couple of weeks ago
20:31:43 <timeless> ... this bug was originally filed because of the need
20:31:49 <timeless> ... when you're supporting transport streams
20:32:01 <timeless> ... to indicate if an Append() is based on where you left off
20:32:07 <timeless> ... or resetting to a different timestamp
20:32:19 <timeless> ... and the solution was to modify Abort() to indicate why you're stopping
20:32:28 <timeless> ... to indicate if an Append() is a continuation
20:32:33 <timeless> ... this combined with other changes
20:32:42 <timeless> ... means that ultimately we found ourselves in a situation where
20:32:49 <timeless> ... even for formats w/ embedded timestamp information
20:33:05 <timeless> ... you wouldn't be able to do an overlapping or out of order fragment
20:33:08 <timeless> ... w/o calling Abort()
20:33:24 <timeless> ... we found that when snapping to the latest snap test
20:33:32 <timeless> ... that the tests we built previously stopped working
20:33:40 <timeless> ... since the file format supported out-of-order fragments
20:33:45 <timeless> ... we weren't including checks to prevent that
20:33:53 <timeless> ... we think this is a valuable part of the spec
20:34:03 <timeless> ... thus this solution for transport streams was imposing an extra burden
20:34:12 <krit1> krit1 has joined #html-wg
20:34:14 <timeless> ... on formats that didn't require this capability
20:35:09 <timeless> ... ideally, formats that support out of order append
20:35:14 <timeless> ... would be required to take no additional steps
20:35:32 <timeless> acolwell: it's more about no ambiguity of steps
20:35:46 <timeless> ... in the transport case, it's unclear if it's a discontinuity or an out of order append
20:35:50 <acolwell> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/default/media-source/media-source.html#sourcebuffer-coded-frame-processing
20:36:10 <timeless> acolwell: step 7 here is the crux of the problem
20:36:23 <timeless> ... where we're detecting if the thing being appended is w/in a range of what was previously appended
20:36:40 <timeless> ... i'm guessing that when this got implemented
20:36:45 <timeless> ... which we haven't implemented in Chrome
20:36:57 <timeless> ... things broke because out-of-order was determined
20:37:00 <timeless> ... when it wasn't before
20:37:15 <timeless> ... we could make it optional for only transport streams only
20:37:25 <timeless> markw: make it required for transport streams
20:37:29 <timeless> ... i'd like to support adrianba 's proposal
20:37:46 <timeless> ... the absence of this is one of the many reasons that MPEG2 transport streams are a bad solution
20:37:52 <timeless> ... which is why other formats are better
20:38:06 <timeless> ... i was surprised that this arrived as a result of the MPEG2 transport stream
20:38:16 <timeless> ... if you need extra hoops for MPEG2 transport streams
20:38:21 <timeless> ... then add it to your list of extra hoops
20:38:27 <timeless> acolwell: does bob or the other cable people
20:38:33 <timeless> BobLund: the motivation for htis
20:38:35 <timeless> s/htis/this/
20:38:44 <timeless> ... this is a response to MPEG2 transport stream
20:38:48 <timeless> ... which has a
20:38:53 <timeless> acolwell: a discontinuity allows
20:38:57 <timeless> ... the timestamps to just shift
20:39:01 <timeless> ... you have to see the frame before
20:39:08 <timeless> ... if you do appends right on the boundary
20:39:14 <timeless> ... it's ambiguous if it's out-of-order or not
20:39:17 <timeless> ... the rule to fix this
20:39:25 <timeless> ... appends were assumed to always be contiguous
20:39:35 <timeless> ... if this happened, you always new the append was supposed to be adjacent
20:39:36 <adrianba> q?
20:39:39 <adrianba> q+
20:39:43 <timeless> ... the proposal is to make this only the case for transport streams
20:39:50 <timeless> ... for MPEG4-ISO and WebM
20:39:53 <timeless> ... there's no need
20:40:10 <timeless> ... the only effect would be that on transport streams, you'll have to call Abort() more often than for ISO/WebM
20:40:24 <timeless> BobLund: you'd have to call Abort() when it's discontinuous?
20:40:33 <timeless> acolwell: no, when you want to do an out-of-order append
20:40:50 <timeless> BobLund: is there a way to signal when there is a discontinuity
20:40:53 <timeless> ... strips will know that
20:41:05 <timeless> acolwell: i was under the impression that scripts wouldn't know
20:41:08 <timeless> ... in HLS you would
20:41:11 <timeless> BobLund: i think that's alright
20:41:15 <timeless> paulc: proposal is in
20:41:23 <timeless> ... in Section-3.5.7 Coded Frame Processing
20:41:31 <timeless> acolwell: i need to look
20:41:37 <timeless> ... i need to figure out exactly where
20:41:50 <timeless> ... i'll put a note saying that for transport streams, the behavior is slightly different
20:41:51 <timeless> ack adrianba
20:42:10 <timeless> adrianba: maybe we can agree here that we do want to change this model
20:42:19 <timeless> ... and make what's currently there not be a problem for formats that include timestamp data
20:42:29 <timeless> ... i have concerns that just changing step 7 to make XX a bit optional
20:42:42 <timeless> s/XX a bit/parts of it/
20:42:50 <timeless> ... using Abort() in this way seemed odd to me
20:42:55 <paulc> Step 7 in 3.5.7 Coded Frame Processing
20:42:56 <timeless> ... it doesn't feel like you're necessarily
20:43:06 <timeless> ... sometimes you call abort when you aren't aborting anything
20:43:15 <timeless> ... Abort() is normally for cancelling a pending append/remove
20:43:24 <timeless> ... here you're calling it outside of that to set some flag
20:43:33 <timeless> acolwell: i think there might be more that needs to change
20:43:40 <timeless> ... i think there's certain state
20:43:46 <timeless> ... Abort() allows us to reset state
20:43:55 <timeless> ... if we don't use Abort(), we'd need to figure out the pieces of the state
20:44:12 <timeless> adrianba: we could create a new method
20:44:18 <timeless> ... and have the bits move there
20:44:24 <timeless> ... and have it be a no-op for other formats
20:44:34 <timeless> acolwell: i think there are a couple of issues w/ how Abort() is being used
20:44:45 <timeless> ... we need to figure out the right separation
20:44:51 <timeless> paulc: do we know what we're going to do here
20:44:52 <adrianba> q?
20:45:18 <timeless> paulc: adrianba, you were asking if we need a different method?
20:45:26 <timeless> adrianba: i was saying i think it's more than making a part optional
20:45:35 <timeless> paulc: so, acolwell, it falls in your court to come up w/ a proposal
20:45:50 <timeless> ... i believe that's the last one
20:45:54 <timeless> ... only other item for MSE is
20:46:01 <timeless> ... as we go to 0 bugs, do we feel we could do an LC?
20:46:11 <timeless> ... any time you do an LC, you have to ask "how long would that LC have to be?"
20:46:17 <timeless> chaals: 3 weeks is the absolute minimum
20:46:22 <timeless> ... longer specs should have more
20:46:25 <adrianba> q+
20:46:28 <timeless> paulc: between 3 and 6 weeks depending on size of spec
20:46:32 <timeless> ... it could be 6 months for some reason
20:46:36 <timeless> ... the TF can make a recommendation
20:46:42 <timeless> ... we'd do a CfC at the WG level
20:46:47 <timeless> ... do you have an idea of schedule
20:46:56 <timeless> ... this is April 23, will we reach 0 bugs in May?
20:46:57 <timeless> acolwell: yes
20:47:14 <timeless> paulc: anyone in the room think once we go to 0 bugs, we shouldn't go to LC?
20:47:21 <timeless> ack adrianba
20:47:30 <timeless> adrianba: i'd like to make a slightly different proposal
20:47:41 <krisk> krisk has joined #html-wg
20:47:43 <timeless> ... historically trying to say we'll get to 0 bugs has been a good way to make things last a long time
20:47:45 <timeless> [ laughter ]
20:47:51 <timeless> adrianba: my alternative proposal is to say
20:47:56 <timeless> ... what we've done in this group is
20:48:02 <timeless> ... "we believe we're getting close to a LC"
20:48:07 <timeless> ... we have work to go and resolve them
20:48:15 <timeless> ... now is the time for a Pre-LC for WG members
20:48:20 <timeless> ... to make sure they've looked through it
20:48:24 <timeless> ... and filed bugs
20:48:31 <timeless> ... if people file bugs after that deadline
20:48:37 <timeless> ... those don't block LC
20:48:44 <timeless> ... the point of LC is to get bugs from outside the WG
20:48:51 <timeless> ... but we're likely to get bugs from inside the WG
20:48:52 <chaals> q+ to say exclusion period means 90 days between LC and...
20:49:19 <timeless> ... we'd commit to resolve bugs filed before the deadline before going to LC
20:49:25 <timeless> ... and others as part of LC
20:49:26 <timeless> ack chaals
20:49:26 <Zakim> chaals, you wanted to say exclusion period means 90 days between LC and...
20:49:56 <timeless> chaals: shortening LC period doesn't necessarily help you
20:50:07 <timeless> ... keep the patent exclusion period in mind
20:50:22 <timeless> janina: you can start the patent exclusion period sooner
20:50:29 <timeless> chaals: it's necessarily from LC
20:50:41 <timeless> acolwell: i'd like to do it as quickly as possible
20:50:44 <timeless> ... we made progress
20:50:50 <timeless> ... i came here a year ago and proposed this spec
20:50:58 <timeless> ... i'd like to keep this pace
20:51:06 <timeless> paulc: where's this in the Process document, chaals ?
20:51:12 <timeless> chaals: it's in the Patent Policy
20:51:48 <timeless> paulc: adrianba 's suggestion is good
20:51:51 <timeless> ... adrianba 's asking for
20:51:55 <timeless> ... Chairs to send out a notice to WG
20:52:02 <timeless> ... "we're getting close to wanting to go to LC in MSE"
20:52:11 <timeless> ... "we're declaring an X-week pre-LC period"
20:52:21 <timeless> ... "any bugs filed after that period will be dealt w/ during LC"
20:52:34 <timeless> ... it sounds like a 3-4 week period for the X-week
20:52:43 <timeless> ... i'll take an action to take an action to discuss that w/ my cochairs
20:52:46 <timeless> adrianba: yes
20:53:36 <timeless> s/pre-LC period/pre-LC period -- bugs filed during that period will be dealt with before LC/
20:53:40 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:53:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
20:53:55 <timeless> Topic: Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) (Media TF)
20:54:05 <timeless> paulc: the Accessibility people had a topic they wanted to discuss
20:54:38 <timeless> topic: [EME] Encouraging alternate media to be in the clear when primary media is encrypted (A11Y TF)
20:54:47 <timeless> paulc: would someone from A11Y TF like to introduce the topic?
20:54:48 <divya> divya has joined #html-wg
20:54:49 <timeless> janina: sure
20:54:52 <timeless> ... the question is
20:54:59 <timeless> ... do we need to encrypt/drm protect/etc
20:55:11 <timeless> ... the various alternative kinds of media that supplement Video/Audio
20:55:18 <sgalineau> sgalineau has joined #html-wg
20:55:18 <timeless> ... in the TF, we've canvased around the Group
20:55:27 <timeless> ... people who create Captions, Described Videos
20:55:44 <timeless> ... if you've read our documents, you'd know we're contemplated other alternative forms
20:55:56 <timeless> ... e.g. a parallel sign language track would cover more cases
20:56:03 <timeless> ... the question is that "does this need to be encrypted?"
20:56:07 <timeless> ... no one seems to really need that
20:56:17 <timeless> ... no one seems to have a UC/need for that
20:56:23 <timeless> ... then, if we go w/ unencrypted content
20:56:24 <chaals> q+ johnf
20:56:33 <timeless> ... how do we make sure that if you don't do so, you won't
20:56:39 <timeless> ... history shows that
20:56:40 <Mark_Vickers> q+
20:56:46 <timeless> ... once you can, people check the box to encrypt
20:56:52 <timeless> ... which presents accessibility issues
20:57:01 <timeless> ... which we should probably avoid unless you need to
20:57:02 <paulc> rrsagent prepare the minutes
20:57:05 <chaals> q+
20:57:21 <markw> q+
20:57:42 <timeless> ... i'd like to ask johnf to speak
20:57:47 <timeless> ... i know he has a contrary view
20:58:00 <timeless> s/foliet/johnf/g
20:58:04 <timeless> johnf: the issue is
20:58:10 <timeless> ... not whether they can/we can
20:58:25 <timeless> ... but whether descriptive audio/descriptive text are encrypted
20:58:32 <timeless> ... they can be mixed in
20:58:43 <timeless> ... you have content A which is unencrypted
20:58:56 <timeless> ... but you have a secondary provider which might want to license additional content B
20:58:59 <chaals> q- later
20:59:07 <timeless> ... and secure their additional content
20:59:16 <timeless> ... i'd like to tease this out w/ the technical guys
20:59:24 <timeless> ... to see if this were a problem
20:59:32 <timeless> ... if we have two streams from different CDMs
20:59:40 <timeless> ... like janina, it isn't like we have definitive answers
20:59:47 <timeless> ... but we have questions to the floor
20:59:49 <timeless> ack Mark_Vickers
20:59:57 <timeless> Mark_Vickers: we're talking about transport formats
20:59:59 <timeless> ... older formats
21:00:07 <timeless> ... captions in the older standards were in band
21:00:13 <timeless> ... if things were encrypted, it was all encrypted
21:00:17 <timeless> ... the import thing is
21:00:20 <timeless> ... not whether it's encrypted
21:00:30 <timeless> ... but whether it's brought out through the standard Text Track APIs
21:00:36 <timeless> ... then it doesn't matter if it's originally encrypted
21:00:44 <timeless> ... i don't believe we have a mandate in the spec that says you have to do that
21:00:48 <timeless> ... you have to make Tracks
21:00:55 <timeless> ... there's nothing that mandates that the stuff comes out
21:00:58 <adrianba> q?
21:01:00 <timeless> q?
21:01:10 <timeless> ack johnf
21:01:11 <JF_> Q+
21:01:16 <timeless> ack markw
21:01:24 <adrianba> q+
21:01:25 <timeless> markw: for Netflix, we don't encrypt Captions tracks
21:01:28 <timeless> ... we don't see any reason to
21:01:33 <timeless> ... or reason why we'd need to in the future
21:01:40 <timeless> ... for this spec, i'd advocate not doing additional work
21:01:43 <timeless> ... w/o requirements
21:01:55 <timeless> ... i don't think we have support/needs for CDMs rendering captions
21:01:57 <timeless> ack chaals
21:01:59 <sgalineau> sgalineau has left #html-wg
21:02:04 <timeless> chaals: i filed a bug on EME
21:02:10 <timeless> ... for the case johnf outlined
21:02:11 <hober> hober has left #html-wg
21:02:14 <BobLund> q+
21:02:16 <joesteele> +q
21:02:18 <hober> hober has joined #html-wg
21:02:20 <timeless> ... there are third party services that do captioning/description
21:02:24 <timeless> ... i know of services that do it
21:02:28 <paulc> Charles bug on tracks: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21741
21:02:30 <timeless> ... i can't think of a service that charges for it
21:02:33 <timeless> ... actually, no, i can.
21:02:45 <timeless> ... if they're charging, and if you have an encryption api
21:02:52 <timeless> ... i'd expect them to want to use it
21:03:13 <timeless> ... i'd expect the people wanting to help people w/ disabilities wouldn't be able to
21:03:21 <timeless> s/johnf/JF_/g
21:03:23 <timeless> ack JF_
21:03:33 <timeless> JF_: because of the possibility of this ... that it could happen
21:03:36 <MarkS> q+ Janina
21:03:37 <timeless> ... between a rock and a hard place
21:03:49 <timeless> ... if the answer is that if it's very easy, very difficult, or something between
21:03:58 <timeless> ... that would help weight what to do
21:04:01 <glenn> q+
21:04:09 <timeless> ... if people say it's a 2 to fix (1..10), v. if it's a 8
21:04:16 <timeless> ... i'd like to understand how hard it'd be to fix
21:04:23 <timeless> ... i'm just concerned it's lingering out there
21:04:24 <timeless> ack adrianba
21:04:42 <timeless> adrianba: the reason we chose not to try to solve this problem in the first release
21:04:51 <timeless> ... was it wasn't entirely clear how we should try to think about this
21:04:59 <timeless> ... because of support for presenting video+audio frames
21:05:07 <timeless> ... typically a UA that would process encrypted captions
21:05:17 <timeless> ... would have to have access to the video/audio
21:05:19 <ddorwin> q+
21:05:35 <timeless> s|video/audio|captions|
21:05:48 <joesteele> q-
21:05:50 <timeless> ... we have a bug 21569
21:06:01 <timeless> ... which talks about the consequence of having Encrypted data in the media element
21:06:03 <MarkS> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21569
21:06:08 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
21:06:13 <timeless> ... talks about not being able to read data from a <video> element
21:06:20 <Zakim> + +1.617.966.aaaa
21:06:25 <timeless> ... e.g. if you have encrypted <video> and you use the <canvas> draw api
21:06:33 <timeless> ... we have a bug to add info to the spec to highlight that case
21:06:38 <timeless> ... it puts the onus on the consuming api
21:06:47 <timeless> ... to handle cases beyond Cross-Origin
21:06:56 <timeless> ... to handle the error path when you don't have access to the media data
21:07:04 <timeless> ... in the absence of the api
21:07:11 <timeless> ... Text Tracks either work or don't
21:07:18 <timeless> ... if a particular app doesn't mind
21:07:23 <timeless> ... it could be seemless to the app
21:07:31 <timeless> ... an app could take in band encrypted captions
21:07:37 <timeless> ... apply it to the video
21:07:46 <timeless> ... but not make it available to the text track api
21:07:56 <paulc> q?
21:08:01 <glenn> q-
21:08:01 <timeless> ... the api could not work if the UA doesn't allow access
21:08:10 <timeless> ... i don't tihnk we need to provide for this explicitly in the spec
21:08:20 <timeless> ... once we gain more implementation experience
21:08:36 <timeless> JF_: you're talking about Text Tracks, what about Descriptive Audio
21:08:45 <timeless> adrianba: we believe we have support for multiple Audio streams
21:09:06 <timeless> JF_: in that UC, your video is encrypted w/ scheme A
21:09:17 <timeless> ... and your audio is encrypted w/ scheme B
21:09:17 <gitbot> gitbot has joined #html-wg
21:09:17 <gitbot> 01[13html01] 15rubys pushed 1 new commit to 06feature/whatwg: 02https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/f57d22e461085c6b27e05580ebbd1dcc8e72dd54
21:09:17 <gitbot> 13html/06feature/whatwg 14f57d22e 15ianh: [giow] (2) Add bitcoin: to the URL scheme whitelist, by request. It's more or less like mailto:....
21:09:17 <gitbot> gitbot has left #html-wg
21:09:20 <timeless> ... will that work
21:09:32 <timeless> chaals: and you don't see that's critical today
21:09:43 <timeless> adrianba: i don't think we need to change the spec to satisfy the requirements
21:09:45 <timeless> ack BobLund
21:09:50 <timeless> BobLund: seems like there are 2 situations
21:09:57 <timeless> ... one is when the tracks are encrypted
21:10:01 <timeless> ... and one where they are not
21:10:21 <timeless> ... it seems like it's up to the CDM to handle embedded encrypted tracks
21:10:26 <timeless> ... for the non-encrypted case
21:10:35 <timeless> ... it seems we need to specify how those are exposed by the UA
21:10:48 <timeless> ... the assumption is that normal audio/video tracks are made available in a standard way
21:11:04 <timeless> ... i don't think we can leave it up to the implementation to decide which tracks are available
21:11:06 <timeless> ack janina
21:11:13 <timeless> janina: back to JF_ 's point
21:11:17 <johnsim> johnsim has joined #html-wg
21:11:20 <timeless> ... i think we have a terminology concern here
21:11:29 <timeless> ... alternative media might be Audio, or Video, or Text Track
21:11:35 <timeless> ... not necessarily one or the other
21:11:36 <adrianba> q?
21:11:38 <timeless> ... both are possible
21:11:41 <timeless> ... how to make it visible
21:11:41 <adrianba> q+
21:11:46 <timeless> ... we ask for quite a lot in UA requirements
21:11:50 <timeless> ... we don't want to just make it visible
21:11:54 <timeless> ... we also want to control
21:12:01 <JonathanJ> rrsagent, draft minutes
21:12:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html JonathanJ
21:12:03 <timeless> ... font color, background, size, portion of resource
21:12:19 <timeless> ... i'm really concerned if we start by worrying about encryption and what can/can't be exposed
21:12:24 <timeless> ... just because we might need it
21:12:30 <timeless> ... we're talking about the current version of the spec
21:12:34 <timeless> ... not the last version
21:12:38 <timeless> ... if we don't have demand for it
21:12:41 <mjs> q+
21:12:42 <timeless> ... why focus on it right now
21:12:48 <timeless> ... we have lots of requirements right now
21:12:51 <timeless> ... seems they're more important
21:12:52 <timeless> ack ddorwin
21:13:12 <adrianba> q- later
21:13:18 <timeless> ddorwin: you're worrying that unencrypted text tracks might not be made available during encrypted playback
21:13:26 <timeless> ... i believe it's implied that they would be available
21:13:38 <timeless> ... i don't know how we can
21:13:47 <timeless> ... i think we should discourage encrypting these tracks
21:14:06 <timeless> ... the biggest concern is that it will be hard to be compatible w/ a lot of platforms
21:14:15 <timeless> ... if someone wants to encrypt, they can do out of band traps
21:14:21 <adrianba> q-
21:14:23 <timeless> ... and use WebCrypto for the same level of protections
21:14:31 <timeless> ack mjs
21:14:39 <timeless> mjs: question... maybe someone knows the answer
21:14:48 <timeless> ... maybe people who know more about media production
21:14:54 <timeless> ... in DRM production on Web today
21:14:59 <timeless> ... w/ plugin today
21:15:04 <timeless> ... are captions today encrypted?
21:15:08 <timeless> ... if they aren't encrypted today
21:15:18 <timeless> ... i'd think there's very little demand for HTML5 solutions
21:15:24 <timeless> q+ chaals
21:15:27 <JF_> Q+
21:15:27 <CyrilRa> q+ CyrilRa
21:15:34 <timeless> ... and perhaps not to be supported
21:15:46 <joesteele> q+
21:15:56 <timeless> BobLund: in encrypted transport of classic format
21:15:58 <timeless> ... it's encrpyted
21:16:04 <timeless> ... in other forms, it's likely not to be
21:16:06 <markw> q+
21:16:10 <timeless> s/encrpyted/encrypted/
21:16:22 <timeless> s/BobLund/glenn/
21:16:36 <timeless> ... except for the third-party encryption case
21:16:48 <timeless> joesteele: when we have encrypted content
21:17:06 <timeless> ... we duplicate them and send them out of band in unencrypted form
21:17:10 <jgay> jgay has joined #html-wg
21:17:16 <timeless> ... on a world-wide basis, i'm not sure if everyone is doing this
21:17:19 <timeless> ack chaals
21:17:31 <timeless> chaals: my impression is that there isn't a huge amount of alternative/extended content being encrypted
21:17:34 <timeless> ... a concern i have today
21:17:38 <timeless> ... is original UC
21:17:52 <timeless> ... the point of being able to encrypt content is that content providers have it as part of their business model
21:18:01 <timeless> ... it seems odd to say that a content provider has the right to do this
21:18:10 <timeless> ... but a disability provider doesn't have that right
21:18:17 <timeless> ... it seems back-ass-words way to do
21:18:19 <timeless> ack JF_
21:18:24 <timeless> JF_: what chaals said
21:18:31 <timeless> ... that we don't have demand now is great
21:18:36 <timeless> ... but that door seems really wide open
21:18:47 <timeless> ... too often, A11Y is chasing after the bus has left
21:18:48 <timeless> ack CyrilRa
21:19:14 <timeless> CyrilRa: at XXX we're aiming at supporting all 3 modes
21:19:17 <timeless> ... embedded in the video
21:19:54 <tobie> tobie has joined #html-wg
21:19:56 <CyrilRa> sorry about that… We are embedding CC within video
21:20:08 <CyrilRa> hence being encrypted
21:20:10 <timeless> chaals: and thus encrypting them?
21:20:13 <adrianba> that assumes that it isn't feasible to do this - my assertion was that the spec doesn't need to change to support this - if there are specific changes someone thinks is needed then that should be proposed concretely
21:20:34 <adrianba> q?
21:21:09 <timeless> ack joesteele
21:21:11 <ddorwin> CyrilRa: What container?
21:21:32 <timeless> joesteele: w/ our DRM, we support encrypted text data in the streams
21:21:39 <timeless> ... judging on the number of bugs in the area
21:21:40 <CyrilRa> MPEG2-TS and MP4
21:21:43 <timeless> ... i don't think anyone is using it
21:21:53 <timeless> ... because i don't think my code is bug free
21:22:04 <CyrilRa> using HLS and HDS
21:22:25 <timeless> ... people use 608/708 data, captions encrypted because stream is encrypted
21:22:38 <timeless> paulc: so you're doing the opposite
21:22:43 <timeless> ... of markw
21:22:55 <ddorwin> CyrilRa: AFAIK: You don't need to encrypt the all streams in a fragmented MP4.
21:22:56 <timeless> joesteele: we're not doing it
21:23:01 <timeless> paulc: someone using your information could do it
21:23:04 <timeless> joesteele: correct
21:23:16 <timeless> ... if we were to provide an API for the CDM to extract that information
21:23:18 <ddorwin> (Not sure about HDS's requirements.)
21:23:22 <timeless> ... then i don't see the point in encrypting it
21:23:24 <paulc> q?
21:23:33 <timeless> ... someone said you could use WebCrypto and it would be just as secure
21:23:35 <timeless> ... i'd agree w/ that
21:23:36 <timeless> ack markw
21:23:46 <timeless> markw: we don't encrypt the captions and don't see the reason to
21:24:00 <timeless> ... for audio/video assistive content
21:24:07 <timeless> ... i don't think we have many
21:24:27 <joesteele> s/I don't think anyone is using it/I am not sure it is being used/
21:24:31 <timeless> ... for captions, if you really want full DRM, you'd be asking the CDM to decrypt and render
21:24:37 <timeless> ... that would be a big additional requirement on the spec
21:24:48 <timeless> ... the only encrypted caption is whether they're embedded in the transport stream
21:24:55 <timeless> ... MPEG2 brings a number of hoops
21:25:13 <timeless> ... if you're given a bunch of hoops and implementing APIs in CDMs
21:25:19 <timeless> ... or just pulling it out yourself
21:25:20 <adrianba> q+
21:25:23 <timeless> ... I know which makes more sense
21:25:35 <timeless> ... the APIs don't exist in protected media pipelines today
21:25:38 <timeless> ack adrianba
21:25:44 <timeless> adrianba: agree w/ what markw just said
21:25:59 <timeless> ... i don't think anything in the spec today prevents someone from doing it
21:26:13 <timeless> ... i don't think there's anything necessary to add to enable this capability
21:26:14 <markw> s/pulling it out yourself/pulling the captions out at the sending side/
21:26:21 <timeless> ... if anyone has a concrete issue not covered by the spec
21:26:27 <timeless> ... i'd like to have it raised
21:26:48 <timeless> paulc: as the queue is empty, i'll move along
21:27:12 <timeless> ... janina, and JF_, you asked for opinions on the current spec, and from content providers
21:27:23 <timeless> ... I think we've come close to meeting your initial goal
21:27:29 <timeless> JF_: hearing it isn't a huge fire
21:27:41 <timeless> ... i'd like to say thanks to the technical guys for lettings us talk through this issue
21:27:45 <timeless> janina: i'm good
21:27:54 <timeless> paulc: i'd like to remind people of what adrianba said
21:27:59 <timeless> ... when you're working in a TF environment
21:28:06 <timeless> ... the best thing to do is give it a concrete bug
21:28:16 <timeless> ... with a pointer saying "this is a bug here, please fix it"
21:28:41 <timeless> ... i'd like to encourage the A11Y TF to treat them the same way as you
21:28:54 <timeless> ... and i'd like to praise chaals for raising a bug to consider the issue
21:29:18 <timeless> [ Coffee break ]
21:32:22 <silvia> silvia has joined #html-wg
21:39:11 <virginie_> virginie_ has joined #html-wg
21:40:08 <libbyr> libbyr has joined #html-wg
22:03:18 <krit> krit has joined #html-wg
22:03:59 <JonathanJ> JonathanJ has joined #html-wg
22:04:07 <darobin> darobin has joined #html-wg
22:05:20 <paulc> test
22:06:04 <jeff> jeff has joined #html-wg
22:06:15 <timeless> topic: Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) (Media TF)
22:06:18 <timeless> paulc: two items
22:06:18 <timeless> ... deep dive into EME bugs
22:06:18 <timeless> ... - take an hour or so
22:06:18 <timeless> ... take a look at the situation of FPWD of EME
22:10:46 <rubys> rubys has joined #html-wg
22:10:48 <Jungkee> Jungkee has joined #html-wg
22:10:54 <krisk> krisk has joined #html-wg
22:11:36 <MichaelC> q+ Daniel
22:12:58 <timeless> adianba: we'd like to start with consistent interoperable errors
22:13:34 <timeless> ... here is a UC for sites to report error conditions back to their hosts
22:13:44 <timeless> ... XXX
22:14:05 <ddorwin> adrianba: Call to action: Review the content protection systems you work with, and collect the error codes that you might want to work with and report those.
22:14:34 <timeless> ddorwin: we don't necessarily need to start w/ the existing bugs
22:14:43 <arun> q+ Austin
22:14:46 <paulc> bug: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21798
22:14:46 <timeless> ... not trying to stuff bugs - round peg squareholes
22:15:18 <timeless> paulc: 21795
22:15:20 <acolwell> acolwell has joined #html-wg
22:15:23 <timeless> ... 16737
22:15:26 <arun> q- Austin
22:15:30 <timeless> ... 16617
22:15:35 <ddorwin> s/stuff bugs/force error codes/
22:15:49 <ddorwin> s/squareholes/square holes/
22:15:58 <joesteele> joesteele has joined #html-wg
22:16:03 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: Daniel_Austin, PayPal
22:16:07 <timeless> q?
22:16:10 <timeless> ack d
22:16:20 <timeless> ... i think we might want to provide a uniform set of status codes
22:16:33 <timeless> ... so users and sites can do diagnostics
22:16:41 <timeless> ... working w/ the WebPerf WG
22:16:48 <timeless> ... i posed a list of status codes to their group
22:16:52 <timeless> s/posed/posted/
22:17:10 <timeless> ... now's a good time to try to get them synced
22:17:10 <adrianba> q?
22:17:27 <timeless> paulc: has anyone else from the TF looked at this?
22:17:39 <timeless> ... I assume one of the parts of the TF will meet next week
22:17:44 <timeless> ... adrianba did you have a time table?
22:17:47 <timeless> adrianba: we have lots of bugs
22:17:53 <timeless> chaals: yesterday would be great
22:18:14 <joesteele> q+
22:18:15 <timeless> [ crickets and popcorn ]
22:18:29 <timeless> ack joesteele
22:18:38 <timeless> joesteele: one of the error codes in there
22:18:45 <timeless> ... service error
22:18:50 <timeless> ... i shouldn't have gone through the existing errors
22:18:55 <timeless> ... but reported the actual errors we use
22:18:56 <JonathanJ> JonathanJ has joined #html-wg
22:19:03 <timeless> ... one distinction in errors i'd like to make
22:19:09 <timeless> ... is customer service errors
22:19:11 <timeless> ... and cdm errors
22:19:22 <timeless> ... an end user error v. a customer's license server triggered failure
22:19:39 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: WebPerf errors don't distinguish that
22:19:46 <timeless> joesteele: we could distinguish errors by domain
22:19:50 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: great suggestion
22:20:04 <timeless> ... i don't want an incomplete set of status codes coming out of perf
22:20:14 <paulc> q+
22:20:18 <timeless> ack paulc
22:20:30 <timeless> paulc: surely WebPerf isn't trying to make the one-ring-to-rule-them-all of error codes
22:20:36 <timeless> ... this is about the distributed web
22:20:43 <timeless> ... we want a spec that says these are some error codes
22:20:57 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: we recommend the IANA registry for HTTP status codes
22:21:13 <timeless> ... we proposed an additional set of error codes for DNS errors
22:21:16 <timeless> ... and SSL errors
22:21:28 <virginie_> virginie_ has joined #html-wg
22:21:31 <timeless> ... and a set of errors for when a user abandons a page
22:21:41 <timeless> ... we haven't taken into account adrianba 's classes
22:21:53 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: i don't want errors scattered across other specs
22:21:57 <adrianba> q+
22:22:12 <ddorwin> Currently being displayed: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2013Apr/att-0007/WebRequestStatusCodes4.html
22:22:39 <timeless> paulc: what about "HTML spec" errors?
22:22:54 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: if you'd like them available to the WebPerf NavigationTiming spec
22:23:28 <markw> q+
22:23:28 <arun> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/NavigationTiming/Overview.html
22:23:41 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: WebPerf WG has published specs for letting apps read counters from the browser
22:23:46 <timeless> ... navigation timings
22:23:48 <timeless> ... resource timings
22:23:51 <timeless> ... a new spec for error logging
22:24:20 <timeless> ... [for when something doesn't load from a CDN]
22:24:29 <Zakim> - +1.617.966.aaaa
22:25:31 <timeless> paulc: what's the link to the logging spec
22:25:38 <timeless> ... and how does it relate to what other WGs are trying to do
22:25:44 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: i'll post a link to the spec
22:25:50 <timeless> ... it doesn't have much beyond the error codes
22:25:59 <timeless> paulc: does this api simply return an error?
22:26:12 <ddorwin> Web Perf Error Logging spec: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/3298bdfd617b/specs/ErrorLogging/Overview.html
22:26:48 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: it returns a list of error codes, and the objects that returned the error, and when
22:26:54 <timeless> ... there are two cases
22:26:59 <timeless> ... one is page load
22:27:05 <timeless> ... and another is for when the browser crashes
22:27:15 <timeless> ... we proposed a limited subset of the data
22:27:19 <timeless> ... that would be persisted
22:27:27 <timeless> ... that would be returned to the source site later
22:27:35 <timeless> ... that case is much more difficult
22:27:44 <timeless> ... we've decided not to specify a specific persistence mechanism
22:27:48 <adrianba> q?
22:27:48 <timeless> paulc: i'll end this discussion now
22:27:57 <timeless> ... we'll give you 15 mins tomorrow
22:28:08 <timeless> ... to give an intro to this spec and what it would mean to the HTML5 UA
22:28:13 <timeless> ... we have time in tomorrow's schedule
22:28:16 <timeless> ... i won't disagree w/ you
22:28:23 <timeless> ... that if the implications are close to what i said
22:28:37 <timeless> ... that this will have implications to what a UA would have to implement
22:28:47 <timeless> ... we'll talk at the end of today or tomorrow morning
22:28:54 <timeless> ... I tried to move of 21798
22:28:59 <markw> ack markw
22:29:01 <timeless> ... and joesteele spoke on CDM
22:29:06 <timeless> ... which led to confusion on CDN
22:29:11 <adrianba> q-
22:29:14 <timeless> ... so, to 20668
22:29:26 <timeless> s/68/88/
22:29:28 <joesteele> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20688
22:29:54 <timeless> adrianba: i think we need to start w/ a bit of history, unfortunately
22:30:02 <timeless> ... we made a bunch of changes over time to the spec
22:30:07 <timeless> ... that brought us to the situation
22:30:11 <timeless> ... in our original submission to the WG
22:30:21 <timeless> ... we had this notion that during the acquisition of a license
22:30:30 <timeless> ... the CDM could force the browser to fire a message to the browser
22:30:56 <timeless> [ long complicated and roundabout ]
22:30:58 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
22:31:01 <timeless> adrianba: it's in the bug
22:31:12 <timeless> ... comment 2 in the bug says what i said
22:31:24 <timeless> ... we modified the API to use a more object oriented approach
22:31:30 <timeless> ... this means that, the way the messages/events are fired
22:31:37 <timeless> ... is a little different than we intended at the beginning
22:31:43 <timeless> ... we talked about it a few times on the call
22:31:52 <timeless> ... i summarized how we were thinking about the model
22:32:00 <timeless> ... but it isn't what's described in the spec
22:32:04 <timeless> ... this value is about one of the events
22:32:14 <timeless> ... keep "KeyAdded", be more precise about what it's for
22:32:25 <timeless> ... in my model, KeyAdded means "license acquisition is complete"
22:32:38 <timeless> ... think about it like progress events, it's like "load event"
22:32:46 <timeless> ... we're done loading, and you can move on
22:32:50 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:32:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
22:33:04 <timeless> adrianba: KeyAdded isn't saying that a key is added
22:33:11 <timeless> ... but that the conversation w/ CDM is finished
22:33:23 <timeless> ... ddorwin said how do you deal w/ license renewal?
22:33:30 <timeless> ... sure you ended initial conversation
22:33:41 <timeless> ... but later during playback, you need to refresh the license
22:33:50 <timeless> ... and i suspect markw is going to comment as well
22:33:59 <timeless> ... and final comment on this, this model is related to some of the other bugs
22:34:06 <timeless> ... bug 19208
22:34:15 <timeless> ... - asks the question about when KeyMessage should be fired
22:34:19 <timeless> ... bug 16553
22:34:39 <paulc> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19208
22:34:39 <timeless> ... - asks the question about a NeedKey event should be fired [an event before this whole process]
22:34:48 <paulc> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16553
22:34:51 <timeless> ... resolving this lifecycle is the largest unanswered question of the spec today
22:34:58 <timeless> ... that's the setup
22:35:10 <timeless> ... i was hoping people would weigh in w/ other questions we'd need to answer
22:35:15 <timeless> ... or suggestions about how we solve this
22:35:15 <timeless> q?
22:35:21 <nonge> nonge has joined #html-wg
22:35:21 <markw> q+
22:35:33 <timeless> ack markw
22:35:43 <timeless> markw: i wonder whether we should take the approach
22:35:46 <ddorwin> q+
22:35:48 <timeless> ... of defining an explicit state
22:35:53 <timeless> ... and defining a variable w/ the state
22:35:57 <timeless> ... [a state machine]
22:36:02 <timeless> ... i think we could try to make that more concrete
22:36:06 <timeless> ... not sure what the states would be
22:36:08 <timeless> ... maybe 3, maybe 4
22:36:15 <timeless> ... i think that would make it much easier to talk about these things
22:36:36 <timeless> ddorwin: even if we had a state for a session, there may be multiple message transfers in progress
22:36:53 <timeless> ... between a CDM and a License server
22:37:00 <adrianba> q+
22:37:01 <timeless> ... you could have two renewal messages for different keys
22:37:11 <timeless> ... if you had a session to represent communication between a CDM and a License server
22:37:13 <markw> q+
22:37:17 <timeless> ... you could have two in progress concurrently
22:37:19 <timeless> ack ddorwin
22:37:20 <adrianba> q- later
22:37:25 <timeless> ack markw
22:37:32 <timeless> markw: on that point
22:37:43 <timeless> ... i think we could take the approach of "what are all things a CDM could want to do"
22:37:57 <timeless> ... or "what is the simple state model that makes sense - and make CDMs work w/ that model"
22:38:12 <timeless> ... if the CDM wants to do two things at once, it constructs a message w/ two things in it
22:38:21 <ddorwin> q+ to ask What specifically does having a "completed" state gain us?
22:38:32 <timeless> ... instead of us imagining everything a CDM might want to do
22:38:34 <timeless> ack adrianba
22:39:07 <joesteele> q+
22:39:32 <timeless> adrianba: i think we need to support two or more pending transactions to license services
22:39:47 <timeless> ... no constraint on count to license server or transactions to a license server
22:40:01 <timeless> ... during decoding, you could encounter a need for another key from another license server
22:40:11 <timeless> ... we do need to have multiple conversations w/ a license server in flight at one time
22:40:16 <timeless> ... at the beginning
22:40:28 <timeless> ... at least, at some point, i had in mind that a session represented that communication
22:40:35 <timeless> ... you'd have one per conversation with a license service
22:40:47 <timeless> ... i think one of the problems is that we've slightly overloaded what we mean
22:40:48 <markw> q+
22:40:54 <timeless> ... with a license service session
22:41:03 <timeless> ... and think we may need to break it into multiple models
22:41:06 <timeless> ack ddorwin
22:41:06 <Zakim> ddorwin, you wanted to ask What specifically does having a "completed" state gain us?
22:41:08 <ddorwin> What specifically does having a "completed" state gain us?
22:41:28 <timeless> ddorwin: you completed
22:41:32 <timeless> ... and send multiple messages
22:41:37 <timeless> ... what do we get from that
22:41:38 <ddorwin> Maybe states for an "initialized" and "has key(s)" would be sufficient?
22:41:59 <virginie_> q?
22:42:02 <ddorwin> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20689
22:42:07 <timeless> ... there's a bug about being told when you have nothing else to send to the server
22:42:18 <timeless> ack joesteele
22:42:27 <timeless> joesteele: if i have a session open
22:42:34 <timeless> ... and i've done my initial exchange w/ a license server
22:42:38 <timeless> ... i do one, two, three exchanges
22:42:45 <johnsim> q+
22:42:47 <timeless> ... and then my license expires, maybe this is key renewal
22:42:54 <timeless> ... the CDM knows i need to renew it
22:43:01 <timeless> ... can it just send a request
22:43:07 <timeless> ... is the app ready to accept that?
22:43:16 <timeless> ... if i have multiple sessions going on
22:43:23 <timeless> ... they can all be in this state at the same time
22:43:24 <adrianba> q+
22:43:30 <timeless> ... they're all independent as far as the application is concerned
22:43:31 <timeless> ack markw
22:43:35 <timeless> markw: to adrianba 's concern
22:43:39 <timeless> ... about multiple sessions
22:43:42 <timeless> ... and key messages
22:43:53 <timeless> ... we left it open for different CDMs to do it different ways
22:44:00 <timeless> ... you could file NeedKey
22:44:02 <timeless> ... or ...
22:44:08 <timeless> ... I think it's best to just pick a model
22:44:27 <timeless> ddorwin: i think with CreateSession we said there was one way
22:44:33 <timeless> ack johnsim
22:44:45 <timeless> johnsim: it's important that the states the CDM goes through
22:44:50 <timeless> ... that the application needs to know about
22:45:00 <timeless> ... are signaled/ known about by the application
22:45:08 <timeless> ... w/o a state diagram, it's hard for the application
22:45:13 <timeless> ... i think that's the missing piece
22:45:18 <timeless> ... wrt how a session is defined
22:45:27 <timeless> ... i think you can't let the way a session is defined be CDM specific
22:45:44 <timeless> ... because then an application won't be able to have a CDM agnostic behavior
22:46:14 <sgalineau> sgalineau has joined #html-wg
22:46:26 <timeless> paulc: you're saying something like what markw said
22:46:32 <timeless> ... abstract to the simplest number of cases
22:46:41 <timeless> ... and then a CDM may have to change its behavior to match our model
22:46:46 <timeless> johnsim: three things
22:46:55 <timeless> ... 1. define the states any CDM will go through that an app needs to know about
22:47:02 <timeless> ... - CDMs can go through states an app doesn't care about
22:47:11 <joesteele> q+
22:47:11 <timeless> ... for any state an app needs to know about, document it in a generic way
22:47:18 <timeless> ... providing events for the application
22:47:27 <timeless> ... 2. define it in such a way, that two different CDMs by different providers
22:47:37 <timeless> ... behave the same way wrt event pattern
22:47:55 <ddorwin> q+ to ask What states do we need/care about? Do we need states if the application knows exactly what it needs to do for a given event? Rephrasing what I asked earlier, do we need one of those states to be "closed"/"ended"?
22:48:03 <timeless> s/three/two/
22:48:15 <timeless> paulc: if we take it at face value that you're right, johnsim
22:48:23 <timeless> ... then we need to know which states the App needs to know about
22:48:26 <timeless> ... what are those states?
22:48:33 <timeless> johnsim: the current spec doesn't define those states
22:48:38 <timeless> ... as much as they're implicit in the event model
22:48:44 <timeless> paulc: and that was markw 's point
22:48:49 <timeless> ... if we defined the points, it would help
22:48:51 <timeless> ack adrianba
22:49:04 <timeless> adrianba: i like markw 's suggestion of having a state variable
22:49:09 <timeless> ... with clearly defined values
22:49:15 <timeless> ... and i think ddorwin 's suggestion of having
22:49:19 <timeless> ... what i described as Finished
22:49:25 <timeless> ... actually indicate "reached steady state"
22:49:36 <joesteele> q-
22:49:41 <timeless> ... the proposal i sort of hinted at in the bug
22:49:45 <JonathanJ> JonathanJ has joined #html-wg
22:49:56 <timeless> ... was to provide a set of events based on progress events
22:50:00 <timeless> ... idea would be, an event fires
22:50:05 <timeless> ... to indicate that the session was initialized
22:50:11 <timeless> ... "load start" equivalent
22:50:23 <timeless> ... what we have for KeyMessage would be the equivalent of "progress"
22:50:38 <timeless> ... and we would fire an equivalent of "loaded" for when KeyAdded was in the proposal
22:50:46 <timeless> ... to indicate that the session was established
22:50:53 <timeless> ... you may still get future key messages for renewal
22:50:58 <timeless> ... but the initial conversation was done
22:51:30 <JonathanJ> rrsagent, draft minutes
22:51:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html JonathanJ
22:51:33 <timeless> adrianba: i'm not sure we'd need to be explicit about Expired or some other reason for a Renewal
22:51:39 <adrianba> q?
22:51:45 <timeless> ack ddorwin
22:51:45 <Zakim> ddorwin, you wanted to ask What states do we need/care about? Do we need states if the application knows exactly what it needs to do for a given event? Rephrasing what I asked
22:51:48 <Zakim> ... earlier, do we need one of those states to be "closed"/"ended"?
22:51:59 <markw> q+ to say how keyrelease fits into this model
22:52:12 <timeless> ddorwin: it's currently stateless
22:52:15 <timeless> ... you get a key message
22:52:21 <timeless> ... get something from the server, pass it back
22:52:24 <timeless> ... works for initialized
22:52:45 <timeless> ... Otherwise, i like adrianba 's states
22:52:52 <timeless> adrianba: one reason i think we need something like loaded
22:52:55 <ddorwin> What states do apps need/care about? Do we need states if the application knows exactly what it needs to do for a given event? Rephrasing what I asked earlier, do we need one of those states to be "closed"/"ended"? If not, then just responding to events may be sufficient.
22:53:00 <timeless> ... is one of the bugs i called out before
22:53:50 <timeless> q?
22:53:53 <timeless> ack markw
22:53:53 <Zakim> markw, you wanted to say how keyrelease fits into this model
22:54:15 <timeless> markw: if we define a bunch of states
22:54:24 <timeless> ... and discover that the states are implicit from the message sequence
22:54:25 <joesteele> q+
22:54:30 <timeless> ... we could leave them in or rip them out
22:54:36 <timeless> ... adrianba mentioned keyrelease
22:54:44 <timeless> ... in that state, if the CDM supports "proof of key release"
22:54:50 <timeless> ... then it's in the position to give you that proof
22:54:59 <timeless> ... and we define what happens for that state transition
22:55:03 <ddorwin> q+
22:55:17 <timeless> paulc: doing a state transition model is important
22:55:24 <timeless> ... so that people can understand what's going on
22:55:32 <timeless> markw: discovering if the implicit thing works or not
22:55:35 <timeless> ... is to be explict
22:55:36 <timeless> ack joesteele
22:55:44 <timeless> joesteele: adrianba 's point
22:55:51 <timeless> ... there's one state needed that isn't implicit
22:56:00 <timeless> ... if a CDM already has a particular key w/o key exchange
22:56:09 <timeless> ... then you want the application to not get a keyrequest message
22:56:18 <timeless> s/not get/not wait to get/
22:56:30 <ddorwin> My summary of (my understanding of) Adrian's proposal:
22:56:33 <ddorwin> States: Uninitialized, initialized ("loadstart"), keymessage ("progress"), keyadded replacement ("loaded")
22:56:37 <ddorwin> I think the last three might be events. The first state is probably implicit.
22:56:40 <ddorwin> The keyadded replacement could be useful for a case where the CDM immediately initializes a session with existing material.
22:57:37 <timeless> ddorwin: the events in quotes are video equivalents
22:57:48 <timeless> ... keyadded is already going to be renamed
22:58:02 <timeless> Zakim, who is on the phone?
22:58:02 <Zakim> On the phone I see Paypal, CyrilRa
22:58:11 <timeless> paulc: we need to decide if someone is going to write a proposal
22:58:17 <adrianba> q?
22:58:21 <timeless> ... someone writes a state diagram and shows if it maps
22:58:24 <timeless> ... and if not ...
22:58:26 <ddorwin> ack ddorwin
22:58:29 <timeless> ... will someone do this?
22:58:39 <timeless> [ paulc lists a bunch of bug numbers ]
22:58:50 <timeless> paulc: there's probably a bug on key release
22:59:00 <timeless> ... adrianba, ddorwin, do you know the next steps?
22:59:13 <timeless> adrianba: it feels like we've made progress in this discussion
22:59:19 <timeless> ... i think the editors have enough to get together
22:59:24 <timeless> ... to make a proposal back to the group
22:59:26 <johnsim> q+
23:00:29 <krit> krit has joined #html-wg
23:00:37 <timeless> ack johnsim
23:00:43 <timeless> johnsim: one of the things, you already have a key
23:00:48 <timeless> ... e.g. from a store
23:00:51 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
23:00:56 <divya> divya has joined #html-wg
23:01:13 <timeless> ... there could be a case where the app wants to force the CDM to make an acquisition
23:01:29 <timeless> ... a CDM could make a License server request
23:01:37 <timeless> ... but CDMs can also make a disk protected key
23:01:42 <adrianba> q+
23:01:50 <timeless> ... some applications might want to force the CDM to get a new key from the License server
23:01:57 <timeless> ... if you support getting a key from the disk
23:02:08 <timeless> ... you need to give the app a way to specify if it permits using a key from the disk
23:02:21 <joesteele> q+
23:02:30 <cabanier> cabanier has joined #html-wg
23:02:40 <timeless> adrianba: i'd like johnsim to file a new bug on this
23:02:45 <timeless> ... to make sure we don't lose it
23:02:52 <timeless> ... proposal i will then make in that bug
23:03:00 <timeless> ... maybe when the event fires to indicate that the session is loaded
23:03:13 <timeless> ... it's possible we want to provide some indication of how it got to that point
23:03:21 <timeless> ... e.g. if it did it through cached key material
23:03:27 <timeless> ... the application could do something
23:03:29 <timeless> ack joesteele
23:03:33 <ddorwin> alternatively, tag the keymessage to indicate "already in progress"
23:03:35 <timeless> ack adrianba
23:03:52 <timeless> joesteele: specific case is renewing a set of entitlements before going offline
23:03:52 <markw> How about this: http://www.websequencediagrams.com/cgi-bin/cdraw?lz=dGl0bGUgQ0RNIFN0YXRlIFByb2dyZXNzaW9uCgpub3RlIG92ZXIgQ0RNOiBVbmluaXRpYWxpemVkAA8OLCBBcHA6IHRpbWUgcGFzc2VzAC0QSQAzCGFlZApDRE0tPgAtBWtleW1lc3NhZ2UKQXBwLT4AZAV1cGRhdGUoKQpvcHQAAyllbgCBBQ86IHJlYWR5AIEUFXBsYXliYWNrACQ-AD0QAIE4CmNsb3NlKCkAgjIQABIFAIFpFiAoa2V5IHJlbGVhc2UpAIF5FA&s=napkin
23:03:53 <sgalineau> sgalineau has joined #html-wg
23:04:01 <timeless> ... if i'm about to go offline
23:04:20 <timeless> ... i thought about offline content long ago
23:04:28 <timeless> ... and decided not to file it
23:04:40 <timeless> ... because offline playback in the browser wasn't a UC under discussion at the time
23:04:58 <timeless> paulc: offline entitlements are different, or just cover more time?
23:05:01 <timeless> joesteele: cover more time
23:05:10 <timeless> paulc: you'll be disconnected, and can't get a renew
23:05:19 <timeless> ... you'd say "give me one now", and it will last longer
23:05:38 <timeless> johnsim: even in the live video case
23:05:43 <timeless> ... or OnDemandVideo
23:05:49 <timeless> ... you're playing content from the web
23:05:55 <timeless> ... you're allowing for local key storage
23:06:02 <timeless> ... the main reason why i felt it needed to be addressed
23:06:11 <timeless> ... i knew in general, such a UC is very common in DRM systems
23:06:24 <paulc> Bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16540
23:06:26 <timeless> ... we shouldn't restrict what we're doing in EME to what we're trying to do now for OnDemandVideo
23:06:48 <timeless> adrianba: this is one joesteele wanted us to talk about
23:06:58 <timeless> joesteele: my concern with this
23:07:02 <timeless> ... the bug is confusing to read now
23:07:09 <timeless> ... about how you're supposed to use the key system
23:07:17 <timeless> ... 1. can we roll capabilities into it
23:07:26 <timeless> ... it was split out, and we decided not to do that in the key system
23:07:29 <timeless> ... 2. verisioning
23:07:37 <timeless> ... UC was to request a specific version of a CDM
23:07:45 <timeless> ... a particular version of a CDM may have a feature an earlier one did not
23:07:47 <jgay> jgay has left #html-wg
23:07:52 <timeless> ... a particular version of a CDM may have been breached
23:07:57 <timeless> ... want to avoid using those
23:08:05 <timeless> s/want/- want/
23:08:16 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #html-wg
23:08:21 <timeless> ... i was thinking we'd register com.adobe.access and com.adobe.access.v{n}
23:08:30 <timeless> ... so we could request the latest one and the generic one
23:08:35 <timeless> ... does that make sense?
23:08:45 <adrianba> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html#key-system
23:08:50 <timeless> paulc: is versioning mention in the bug?
23:08:56 <timeless> ddorwin: you have to look at the spec
23:09:15 <gitbot> gitbot has joined #html-wg
23:09:15 <gitbot> 01[13html01] 15rubys pushed 2 new commits to 06feature/whatwg: 02https://github.com/w3c/html/compare/f57d22e46108...31bbb5f68cbf
23:09:15 <gitbot> 13html/06feature/whatwg 14e2287ae 15ianh: [e] (0) Try to clarify use of the term 'expose' in the WebIDL sense....
23:09:15 <gitbot> 13html/06feature/whatwg 1431bbb5f 15ianh: [e] (0) Remove redundant requirements....
23:09:15 <gitbot> gitbot has left #html-wg
23:10:00 <adrianba> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html#dom-istypesupported
23:10:03 <timeless> paulc: your proposal was appending something to example com.example.somesystem.1 and com.example.somesystem.1_5
23:10:16 <timeless> paulc: this is obscure being linked to this particular bug
23:10:27 <timeless> adrianba: i pasted another link that talks about this
23:10:30 <yoav_> yoav_ has joined #html-wg
23:10:36 <timeless> ... joesteele was talking about isTypeSupported()
23:10:41 <timeless> ... the original design is that
23:10:51 <timeless> ... you could make a request isTypeSupported( com.example.somesystem )
23:11:01 <timeless> ... that would return true if the general system is supported
23:11:07 <timeless> ... if no, you wouldn't interrogate further
23:11:15 <timeless> ... if yes, you could ask about v1, v1.5
23:11:21 <timeless> ... i think the question raised in this bug is
23:11:25 <timeless> ... do we need to add
23:11:32 <timeless> ... text to the spec that describes this more
23:11:38 <timeless> ... gives greater guidelines
23:11:44 <timeless> ... is this pattern something that's actually neede
23:11:48 <timeless> s/neede/needed/
23:11:54 <timeless> ... or is it something down to the CDM?
23:12:06 <timeless> ... it's unlikely that you'd write code that follows this pattern in a generic way
23:12:19 <timeless> ... since the capabilities of different versions will be different across different systems
23:12:28 <timeless> paulc: joesteele, is the system powerful enough to use in the way you want to use
23:12:34 <timeless> joesteele: yes, it's probably overkill than what we'd want
23:12:42 <timeless> ... we could live w/ an explicit string match
23:12:50 <timeless> ... having browsers do this is more than we'd need
23:12:58 <timeless> chaals: this code assumes linear progression
23:13:05 <timeless> ... and you want hasMinimumVersion()
23:13:19 <timeless> ... is that likely to be a pattern?
23:13:45 <timeless> paulc: i'll take anything after version 3?
23:13:53 <timeless> chaals: if IE3
23:14:01 <timeless> adrianba: and the people that do, we're trying to shoot
23:14:23 <timeless> ... it's no coincidence that this is tied to the other bug about capability detection
23:14:36 <timeless> ... no coincidence that we'd park that bug until we decided on what we need to detect
23:14:57 <timeless> ... maybe we can say we don't need this sophisticated approach
23:15:09 <timeless> ... maybe we can push toward feature detection instead of particular versions
23:15:23 <timeless> chaals: did you discover trying to push people to feature detection
23:15:30 <timeless> ... because people did version detection?
23:15:43 <timeless> ... are we opening up a way for authors to make mistakes early?
23:15:45 <timeless> adrianba: maybe
23:15:56 <timeless> ... i'd rather try to catch it early than try to predict and get it wrong
23:16:06 <timeless> chaals: i think i'd like to do the same
23:16:11 <timeless> paulc: enough discussion on 16540?
23:16:18 <timeless> ... sounds like simple string matches
23:16:22 <timeless> ... if we aren't doing capabilities
23:16:29 <timeless> ... after that, you can use another mechanism
23:16:39 <timeless> ... next is 19009
23:17:00 <paulc> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19009
23:17:13 <timeless> adrianba: we discussed this on a call
23:17:17 <timeless> ... the minutes didn't really
23:17:20 <timeless> ... describe a conclusion
23:17:28 <jernoble> jernoble has joined #html-wg
23:17:37 <timeless> paulc: these are the minutes in comment 6?
23:17:45 <timeless> adrianba: yes, but it points to a not useful, but lengthy discussion
23:17:52 <timeless> ... conclusion i think we reached
23:17:56 <timeless> ... was that we should add a note to the spec
23:18:15 <timeless> ... that some implementations might require the media keys be attached to a media element before the event sequence would take place on a session
23:18:24 <timeless> ... this is somewhat tangentially related to the original bug
23:18:29 <timeless> ... i think that conclusion means that we're ok to
23:18:34 <timeless> ... follow the pattern we have right now
23:18:55 <timeless> ... make it so that implementations may throw an exception if they don't support media keys being shared across multiple elements
23:19:02 <timeless> ... that's likely for initial implementations
23:19:14 <timeless> ... important thing is that we need to add a note about requiring attachment
23:19:21 <timeless> paulc: action?
23:19:27 <timeless> adrianba: action is to edit the spec w/ the note
23:19:37 <timeless> ... just wanted to clarify that this is the next action
23:19:46 <timeless> ... and give people a chance to comment if they disagree
23:19:55 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
23:19:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
23:20:00 <bryan> bryan has joined #html-wg
23:20:03 <timeless> paulc: any last things to address?
23:20:07 <timeless> ddorwin: 20335
23:20:11 <ddorwin> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20335
23:20:13 <timeless> ... canPlayType
23:20:18 <timeless> ... supports "", "maybe", "probably"
23:20:29 <timeless> ... initially in MSE, we have isTypeSupported
23:20:35 <timeless> ... should we also return boolean?
23:20:49 <timeless> ... does anyone support canPlayType()s 3 states, none of which are true
23:20:53 <timeless> ... anyone have an opinion?
23:20:55 <johnsim> q+
23:21:22 <MarkVickers> MarkVickers has joined #html-wg
23:21:45 <timeless> paulc: if we change it to a boolean, the probably case goes away?
23:21:48 <timeless> [ maybe ]
23:21:55 <timeless> paulc: what's the UC for Probably?
23:22:03 <timeless> q
23:22:06 <timeless> s/q//
23:22:07 <timeless> q?
23:22:08 <adrianba> q+
23:22:11 <timeless> ack johnsim
23:22:11 <chaals> q+ bobl
23:22:19 <timeless> johnsim: Probably/Maybe concepts
23:22:20 <chaals> q- adrianba later
23:22:23 <timeless> ... is ...
23:22:27 <chaals> q+ adrianba
23:22:34 <timeless> ... you can't tell from media util you play it whether you can really play it
23:22:42 <timeless> ... it isn't just searching for attributes
23:22:53 <timeless> ... i don't see a case where any uncertainty should reside
23:23:02 <timeless> ... as to whether or not content is decryptable by that key system
23:23:07 <joesteele> q+
23:23:11 <timeless> ... you don't know if the license server will honor the request for the key
23:23:36 <timeless> ddorwin: we pass in the container as well
23:23:41 <timeless> ack BobLund
23:23:43 <timeless> ack b
23:23:49 <timeless> BobLund: canPlayType
23:23:59 <timeless> ... probably is meant to say "does the UA support mime type"
23:24:04 <virginie_> virginie_ has joined #html-wg
23:24:10 <timeless> ... whether UA can decrypt it is irrelevant to canPlayType
23:24:11 <timeless> ack adrianba
23:24:19 <timeless> adrianba: i wanted to describe two alternatives
23:24:28 <timeless> ... spec has isTypeSupported as a boolean
23:24:32 <timeless> ... you use this method to answer
23:24:47 <timeless> ... "does the UA support decrypting content in this format using this content protection system"
23:25:01 <timeless> ... if the UA says "probably" or "maybe"
23:25:07 <timeless> ... and you add in the content type
23:25:14 <timeless> ... and key system
23:25:28 <timeless> ... might you get the same answer as canPlayType
23:25:41 <timeless> ... otoh, supporting canPlayType and isTypeSupported
23:25:47 <timeless> ... then a bool would work
23:26:02 <timeless> ... what does an app do differently if it sees maybe or probably?
23:26:08 <timeless> ... it's just going to try to play the content
23:26:21 <adrianba> q?
23:26:22 <timeless> ... if you know definitively that it won't work, you probably try the next content
23:26:29 <timeless> ... but if you know it's potentially supported
23:26:31 <danielfilho|w> danielfilho|w has joined #html-wg
23:26:35 <timeless> ... then you probably just try to play it
23:26:42 <ddorwin> There are probably less random formats to deal with in EME as well.
23:26:43 <timeless> joesteele: we'd probably prefer a boolean
23:26:47 <timeless> ... yes it may fail
23:26:57 <timeless> ... it may mean it can't play that instance, but just that instance
23:27:01 <timeless> paulc: hearing a bool pref
23:27:27 <danielfi_> danielfi_ has joined #html-wg
23:27:37 <timeless> ... anyone can give us an example of why it shouldn't be a boolean
23:27:49 <timeless> joesteele: you ask about a mime type
23:27:56 <timeless> paulc: and i can give you a mislabeled stream
23:28:02 <timeless> ... ddorwin you asked about this type
23:28:07 <timeless> ... did i get you an answer?
23:28:14 <timeless> ... and don't say "probably" or "maybe"
23:28:17 <timeless> [ laughter ]
23:28:27 <timeless> Topic: First Public Working Draft status
23:29:35 <paulc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Feb/0123.html
23:29:45 <timeless> paulc: we asked about whether something was in scope
23:29:51 <timeless> ... eventually ruled it was in scope
23:30:03 <timeless> ... whether FPWD contained enough to be implemented interoperably
23:30:14 <timeless> ... we asked for clear and specific bug reports in Bugzilla by Feb 15
23:30:28 <timeless> ... once that was complete, we were going to seek answer from editors on how to proceed
23:30:33 <timeless> ... process bar for FPWD is fairly low
23:30:45 <timeless> ... when we reevaluate request to publish
23:30:52 <timeless> ... we'd only consider things based on bugs
23:30:57 <timeless> ... but no requirement of reaching 0 bugs
23:31:11 <timeless> ... TF received approximately 15 bugs
23:31:17 <timeless> ... in the window
23:31:24 <timeless> ... i provided a summary on the Media TF
23:31:35 <paulc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2013Apr/0089.html
23:31:49 <timeless> ... my first email goes over the history
23:31:54 <timeless> s/15/13/
23:32:21 <timeless> ... it's a bit hard to give concise status of bugs
23:32:27 <timeless> ... it's hard to handle REOPENed
23:33:15 <timeless> ... the respondent disagreed with being able to take a document to FPWD with bugs open
23:33:26 <timeless> ... some respondents have commented on everything as "i disagree"
23:33:32 <timeless> ... which makes it hard to have a dialog
23:33:38 <timeless> s/dialog/dialogue/
23:33:40 <timeless> ... for 20944
23:33:49 <timeless> ... - we left it open and proposed to add a SOTD
23:33:54 <timeless> ... i think we did this for 2 or 3
23:33:56 <timeless> adrianba: 3
23:34:03 <timeless> paulc: we believe there's technical merit in the comment
23:34:12 <timeless> ... but we don't believe it should stop us from going to FPWD
23:34:19 <timeless> ... we resolved several as WONTFIX
23:34:31 <timeless> ... i included link to bug and editor's response explaining why
23:34:43 <timeless> ... - which typically includes the link to the minutes
23:34:47 <timeless> ... here's one w/ needsinfo
23:34:52 <timeless> ... - which was reopened w/ no new info
23:34:58 <timeless> ... a couple were resolved worksforme
23:35:03 <timeless> ... - we took an appropriate action
23:35:17 <timeless> ... 20965 and 20966 were SOTD items
23:35:23 <timeless> ... one we resolved as a duplicate
23:35:26 <timeless> ... and one as later
23:35:42 <timeless> ... several of these bugs have been reopened by the correspondent on a regular basis
23:35:59 <timeless> ... even if the correspondent didn't change the status of the bug
23:36:17 <timeless> ... all of these bugs are attempts to characterize why not to do EME in the HTML WG
23:36:22 <timeless> ... there are more filed after the bug-window
23:36:28 <timeless> ... there are probably 4 or 5 more
23:36:35 <timeless> ... the people against this work being done in the WG
23:36:40 <timeless> ... when their current arguments fail
23:36:45 <timeless> ... they find new arguments
23:37:16 <timeless> paulc: the TF + editors have responded to chairs
23:37:34 <timeless> ... based on the bugs in the window to Feb 15
23:37:46 <timeless> ... i think it's germane for the chairs to review if the bugs have been dealt w/ adequately
23:37:51 <timeless> ... and decide if we can replay the CfC
23:37:57 <timeless> ... or decide if the document can be published
23:38:15 <timeless> rubys: i don't think CfC is the right step
23:38:24 <timeless> ... we don't need Consensus per process
23:38:29 <plh> q+
23:38:33 <timeless> ... having read the bugs, i don't think we have questions
23:38:45 <timeless> paulc: i want to be fair to my cochairs and apologize to the TF
23:38:47 <divya> divya has left #html-wg
23:38:52 <timeless> ... this has been on my plate for a while
23:39:02 <timeless> ... i told rubys and mjs that i sent this after lunch
23:39:19 <timeless> ... the appropriate step is for chairs to take this under advisement and report back to the WG
23:39:29 <timeless> ... mjs, there's a lot of reading
23:39:40 <timeless> ... do any of the 3 editors of EME want to comment?
23:39:46 <timeless> ... did i summarize this accurately?
23:39:50 <timeless> adrianba: yes, good summary
23:39:54 <timeless> ... we call out 3 of the bugs in SOTD
23:39:59 <timeless> ... two issues:
23:40:09 <timeless> ... 1. degree to which spec supports interop between implementations
23:40:15 <timeless> ... 2. issue around privacy considerations
23:40:22 <timeless> ... from discussions we've gone through these bugs
23:40:28 <timeless> ... i think we've made progress on privacy
23:40:43 <timeless> ... my suggestion for privacy is to add a section to the spec which is privacy considerations for CDMs
23:41:01 <timeless> ... people in WG asked if the current API would support some privacy related situations
23:41:08 <timeless> ... some of the cases I believe are already handled
23:41:12 <timeless> ... beyond guidance to CDMs
23:41:17 <timeless> ... which we'd add in an informative way
23:41:24 <timeless> ... does anyone see API changes necessary for privacy aspects
23:41:32 <timeless> paulc: has that direction been reflected in the bug at all?
23:41:38 <timeless> adrianba: no, we need to update the bug
23:41:50 <timeless> paulc: that would be useful, if you could do that post-facto to this discussion
23:42:01 <plh> q?
23:42:08 <timeless> ... chairs will use my summary as the response to the CfC
23:42:18 <timeless> ... and we'll get back to editors+TF as soon as possible
23:42:23 <timeless> q- joesteele
23:42:25 <timeless> ack plh
23:42:29 <timeless> plh: if i heard chairs correctly
23:42:34 <timeless> ... we may not have a new CfC
23:42:44 <timeless> rubys: statement i made, not a chair statement
23:42:55 <timeless> plh: my concern is if it will surprise the group if we don't have a CfC
23:43:06 <timeless> mjs: we have past precedent for CfC to publish a WD
23:43:23 <timeless> ... and having done a good faith effort, we said "with these addressed, it was ok to publish"
23:43:32 <timeless> ... if we wanted to follow W3 process
23:43:36 <timeless> ... we could have a formal vote
23:43:54 <timeless> [ paulc reads from previous chairs CfC response ]
23:44:30 <timeless> rubys: i sent an email on the 24th
23:44:45 <timeless> ... ~consensus is not a requirement for publication~
23:44:46 <wseltzer> q+
23:44:58 <BobLund> BobLund has joined #html-wg
23:45:07 <timeless> steve: are chairs saying
23:45:11 <timeless> ... there will be a FPWD
23:45:15 <timeless> rubys: still deciding
23:45:21 <timeless> steve: and that decision will not be a CfC?
23:45:28 <timeless> rubys: my input is it probably will not be
23:45:35 <timeless> paulc: it won't be public
23:45:39 <timeless> ack wseltzer
23:46:02 <timeless> wseltzer: Wendy Seltzer
23:46:07 <timeless> ... noting that the response to several of the bugs
23:46:14 <timeless> ... ~CDMs are out of scope for this document~
23:46:22 <timeless> ... several seem to be things people are complaining about
23:46:26 <timeless> ... are things required of CDMs
23:46:30 <timeless> ... but not things above them
23:46:32 <adrianba> q+
23:46:34 <rubys> rubys has joined #html-wg
23:46:38 <markw> q+
23:46:41 <timeless> ... would it be ok for them to file bugs asking for CDMs to be brought into scope
23:46:47 <rubys> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Apr/0053.html
23:46:50 <timeless> ... this is requiring activity but not specifying it
23:46:52 <mjs_> mjs_ has joined #html-wg
23:46:53 <mjs_> q+
23:47:04 <timeless> ack adrianba
23:47:22 <timeless> paulc: i'd like to thank chaals for his leg-work
23:47:23 <timeless> [ applause ]
23:47:34 <timeless> adrianba: it's true there were a number of bugs
23:47:44 <timeless> ... commenting on CDMs being out of scope of the EME spec
23:47:50 <timeless> ... it's true that this is the design of the EME spec
23:47:55 <timeless> ... EME is designed to abstract away CDMs
23:48:02 <timeless> ... to provide a common api for CDMs
23:48:09 <timeless> ... and provide a common api for that abstraction
23:48:19 <timeless> ... W3 decided that such an API was within scope for the WG
23:48:26 <timeless> ... EME spec is a solution for the problem
23:48:31 <timeless> ... it isn't the only way to solve the problem
23:48:39 <timeless> ... someone who believes the full capabilities should be w/in scope
23:48:44 <timeless> ... may write the spec
23:48:53 <timeless> ... to try to address a spec that by design isn't in scope
23:49:01 <timeless> ... is essentially saying throw away the spec and start again
23:49:03 <timeless> ack markw
23:49:13 <timeless> markw: we could add something to say what we mean by CDMs being out of scope
23:49:21 <timeless> ... we don't define the APIs that the CDM might support
23:49:32 <timeless> ... it has key messages, we talk about a state machine
23:49:35 <timeless> ... we say CDM is out of scope
23:49:41 <timeless> ... but we define a bit about how you talk to it
23:49:44 <chaals> q+
23:49:49 <timeless> ... it sounds like defining part of CDM
23:49:51 <timeless> ack mjs_
23:50:05 <timeless> mjs_: re: what is exactly required for CDMs
23:50:10 <timeless> ... i think there's one bug left open
23:50:14 <timeless> ... with an issue note in the spec
23:50:16 <timeless> ... 20944
23:50:22 <timeless> ... EME sure do more to ensure CDM level interop
23:50:28 <timeless> ... there's been a lot of discussion in that bug
23:50:38 <timeless> ... many of the other bugs were roundabout ways to get at the same issue
23:50:46 <timeless> ... i think it's best of have one bug for that matter
23:50:49 <timeless> ... ---
23:50:57 <timeless> mjs_: a more procedural issue
23:51:03 <timeless> ... 21016
23:51:05 <timeless> ... ClearKey
23:51:14 <timeless> ... - i don't care much about the bug actually
23:51:31 <timeless> ... our usual approach for LATER is to use only for "not this current version of this spec"
23:51:38 <adrianba> q+
23:51:41 <timeless> ... i assume we'll have implementation experience by CR
23:51:48 <timeless> ... i'd propose keeping the bug open
23:51:59 <timeless> ... and having an implementation marker
23:52:12 <timeless> q?
23:52:21 <timeless> ack chaals
23:52:31 <timeless> chaals: instead of writing an entire spec from scratch
23:52:38 <timeless> ... they could propose a modified version of the spec
23:52:43 <timeless> ... which modifies the scoping
23:52:51 <timeless> ... if you modify the proposal for a tower
23:52:58 <timeless> ... to have the tower have an antenna on top
23:53:07 <timeless> ack adrianba
23:53:14 <timeless> adrianba: could you start from EME and add in a CDM
23:53:20 <timeless> ... and remove the abstraction of CDM
23:53:21 <timeless> ... sure
23:53:28 <timeless> ... is that different from starting from scratch?
23:53:30 <timeless> ... i dunno
23:53:38 <timeless> paulc:  you guys are making it hard for me to recess by 5pm
23:53:46 <timeless> chaals: if you want to make a smaller change to the scope
23:53:55 <timeless> ... then the difference becomes more interesting
23:54:04 <timeless> paulc: no one has tried to ask about an extension spec to an extension spec
23:54:06 <timeless> [ laughter ]
23:54:16 <timeless> adrianba: mjs_ made the point that there's still a bug about part of this
23:54:23 <timeless> ... many of the bugs essentially raised the same point
23:54:28 <timeless> ... about interop
23:54:31 <timeless> ... between UAs
23:54:34 <timeless> ... and it's a valid issue
23:54:48 <wseltzer> q?
23:54:49 <timeless> ... the bugs wseltzer mentioned where CDMs were indicated as out of scope
23:54:55 <timeless> ... asked for essential design changes
23:54:57 <timeless> ... my position is
23:55:02 <timeless> ... if i were to solve for those bugs
23:55:07 <timeless> ... i probably wouldn't start w/ this spec
23:55:36 <timeless> paulc: thank you Josh_Soref for scribing
23:55:39 <timeless> [ Applause ]
23:55:58 <timeless> paulc: do we need to retrace our steps with you?
23:56:08 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
23:56:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
23:56:25 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: everything is locked at 5pm
23:56:32 <timeless> paulc: and we're in a different room?
23:56:52 <timeless> Daniel_Austin: yes, you'll be escorted to the new room like today
23:56:56 <timeless> ... please keep your badges
23:56:59 <timeless> ... there's a reception tomorrow
23:57:01 <timeless> [ Adjourned ]
23:57:06 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
23:57:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless
23:57:10 <timeless> RRSAgent, make logs public
23:58:15 <timeless> RRSAgent, make minutes
23:58:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html timeless