See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 18 February 2014
<paulc> EME heartbeat was published today: http://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/3670
<scribe> scribenick: joesteele
Previous minutes -- http://www.w3.org/2014/02/04-html-media-minutes.html
<paulc> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2014Feb/0012.html
paulc: still pinging Wendy on ACTION-61 with no results
<wseltzer> [Still trying... ]
<paulc> EME heartbeat was published today: http://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/3670
<wseltzer> [I'll send another follow-up inquiry]
paulc: heartbeat published
today
... noted that Robin sent the editors a couple of suggestions
to improve boilerplate material
paulc: updated agenda with status since last meeting, let's step through each item today
paulc: David was going to implement comment #3
ddorwin: no progress
<paulc> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17202
ddorwin: this one is lower priority
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17673
paulc: David was going to implement and get in touch with David Singer
ddorwin: think it was Adrian not me
adrianba: had an email conversation with David Singer about this, got stalled
<paulc> Feb 4 minutes on bug 17673 is here: http://www.w3.org/2014/02/04-html-media-minutes.html#item04
adrianba: explained the situation
to him, think the action on David Dorwin was to create a
sepratae bug on type supported, my action was to follow up with
David Singer
... so my status is that conversation is in progress
ddorwin: my item is in progress
pal: just to confirm those bugs
17673 will remain focused on initData format, correct?
... and new bug will be created for isTypeSupported?
paulc: correct
pal: what is the latest proposal for initData identification?
adrianba: the comments in the bug
starting with 7 and referencing emails as well point to
this
... not sure the design is specific right now
... trying to determine whether we need to change away from
what we had before
... I think David Dorwin proposed that, in the past there has
been disagreement with David Singer on this
... think there are two parts
... do we have consensus to move to something other than
content type?
... if so -- what is the idenfitier we should use?
pal: the first level is what should the spec define? and 2nd part is what ISO identifier should be used?
adrianba: ISOBMFF has different
mechanisms for identifying, we want to be more specific
... a user agent who only wnats to support CENC only needs to
write code for that
... previous proposal you at least had to idenfity the
information in the file even if you did not use that
... wanted to make it possible for the implementations to be
simpler and not have to decode generic ISOBMFF
pal: so we do not have a concrete proposal yet?
adrianba: those things are not
necessarily tied together
... we have had no-one object yet to this change, but in the
past David Singer has objected
... we also have not had support from this from anyone
else
... need concensus from more than one or two people
pal: I would love to be able to weigh in on the concensus one way or the other, but not clear what the proposal is
adrianba: let me try to
summarize
... the key question is -- should the spec describe all of the
ISOBMFF all of the different boxes that may contain information
ot be used to contain initData in a general enough way to allow
a browser to see those boxes and pass them via the needkey
event, even if the browser only supports CENC
... rather than when the needkey event fires and the content
type saying video/mp4 (lot's of discussion about what the type
should be)
... we could say the string is "CENC" which means the event
data is an array of PSSH boxes
... if it was some other encoding you would have a different
string
pal: and the proposal is that the spec would specify the CENC method and would associate a unique string with that?
adrianba: essentially
... believe that once we get done with EME we will have
follwoed the pattern we did with MSE and moved the specific
information about media format into a spearate doc
... already noted as non-normative
... then we would have the equivalent registry page doing the
mappings
pal: ok
<ddorwin> I updated the bug with the two questions Adrian described
<paulc> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17673#c41
are we going down that path?
<adrianba> is there anyone on the call that objects?
paulc: provides link to the questoins
joesteele: no objection from me
paulc: any objections from folks on this?
pladd: sounds good
ddorwin: already in a hole with isTypeSupported so this is progress
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17682
ddorwin: this is low priority but in my queue
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17750
adrianba: I started to look at
this, think I need some more study of the current
language
... think I talked about my instincts on this last time, has
not changed, but David is asking a very precise question of a
precise definition
... not sure if we have an implementation IE of schedule
intact
... not looking for more info -- just time
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18515
paulc: status was that Jerry would ask for an editor to implement
jdsmith: have not done that yet, working with Adrian
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20944
paulc: no progress yet
<paulc> ACTION-62?
<trackbot> ACTION-62 -- Paul Cotton to Report back about the plan for 20944 due 2013-12-15 -- due 2013-12-10 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/media/track/actions/62
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21798
paulc: David was going to generate a response
ddorwin: 3rd on my list
... still pending
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23619
paulc: Adrian was going to discuss with Travis at Microsoft
adrianba: I have, trying to find
a reference
... will find it offline and add to the bug
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23828
paulc: this one is paired with 23827 -- low priority
<paulc> Paired with 23827
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24025
paulc: add optional parameters to constructor
markw: did add a use case to the bug but only about 10 min ago
paulc: what are the next steps
<paulc> See https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24025#c9
+q
paulc: bug 24082 is related
... think we should move on at this point
... other members of the team should add use cases
<paulc> See Joe's use case(s): https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24082#c1
joesteele: added some use cases to 24082
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24026
ddorwin: on my todo list but low priority
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24027
paulc: generic data initialization solution for ISOBMFF, mark agreed to make a proposal
markw: not a detailed change proposal, more of an outline, but if folks agree should be simple
<paulc> See proposal in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24027#c6
paulc: folks should review this
comment
... before next meeting if possible
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24081
paulc: Ready state is too limiting
ddorwin: not done yet -- pretty
far reaching change
... covers a lot of text
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24216
paulc: Adrian said Jerry was looking at this - Jerry what is the status?
jdsmith: meh
... looking in my email -- give me a few
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24270
paulc: Jan 28th David made a partial change, David is there more work pending?
ddorwin: we kinda inverted the
original intent of the bug, now it is lower priority
... but we are in agreement and I have what I need
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24323
joesteele: will be looking at this this week
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24368
paulc: Jerry was going to review proposal
jdsmith: still catching up -- can talk about other one now
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24216
jdsmith: David made some
proposals where key are detached and re-used to play different
content
... we don't have support to allow this, detachment is not
synchronous, he pointed out issues that can occur
... we do not have a prominent use case for this
... don't know all of the use cases folks would have for
this
+q
ddorwin: don't know how common this is -- was concerned that because this is an object now all kinds of things could happen
<paulc> see Joe's use case: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24216#c1
ddorwin: this came up because of
the way the API is designed, might be a corner case no one will
use
... just under specified
... don't think this is possible to be smooth in most
implementations
paulc: as Jerry said this should be simple -- low value use case
jdsmith: this would favor option
#1 -- have to stop playback
... options were
... 1. allow detaching when stopped
... 2 allow detach while in the process of stopping
... 3 define detaching events so you have a clean
notification
ddorwin: my recommendation was for #2
jdsmith: I could live with #2 also
joesteele: I could live with 1 or 2
paulc: should we shoot for option
2 and try for agreement
... any objections on the call?
... hearing no objections -- David that is on your queue
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24381
paulc: setMediaKeys appears superfluous -- Adrian was looking for dup. bug
adrianba: yes it was a bug 20337 we resolved a year ago
paulc: that is an MSE bug -- does
not make sense
... https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20337
... are you saying if we act on this bug it would reverse the
earlier bug?
adrianba: yes
paulc: I suggest editors reject
and point to that earlier bug
... resolved as a duplicate already
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24199
ddorwin: I will implement the solution in this bug, once the other clearKey bugs is done, another low priority bug
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24673
paulc: make content type string check case-sensitive
ddorwin: we made keysystem string case-sensitive, this would make consistent
paulc: any comments from the floor on this bug?
adrianba: I wonder if this is
worth changing, think our goal is to use the same code as when
we receive a content string over the wire
... don't believe that is case-sensistive
paulc: I will put that in your queue then
markw: will you see a difference
between case-sensitive and string-equality Unicode-code point
equivalence
... wonder what exactly is meant here?
paulc: most people who handle have four or five different use cases
adrianba: not clear to me that in general that the data gets sent with those alternate characters given the strings we are talking about
markw: we should use terminiology that is clear about that
dddorwin: should probably use lower-case ascii
joesteele: might be useful to refer to the HTTP RFC for language
paulc: sounds like we have a
couple of folks who could add comments to this bug
... should be simple but clear as to which cases we are
covering
... gone through all the outstanding bugs -- do we meet next
week or in two weeks?
... did not appear to get more work done in the extra
week
... David you have a lot on your queue - what is your
opinion?
ddorwin: we should meet when
there are concrete things to discuss - not just stuff in the
queue
... no reason for a meeting if folks have not done the
reading
paulc: meeting seems to trigger
action in some cases
... for next meeting I will try to add more information about
progress on the bugs
... propose we meet again in two weeks -- March 4th
+1
paulc: ok -- adjounred
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/menas/means/ Succeeded: s/bug 20327/bug 20337/ Succeeded: s/check case-insensitivie/check case-sensitive/ Succeeded: s/string case-insensitive/string case-sensitive/ Succeeded: s/dorinw: /ddorwin: / Succeeded: s/tool limiting/too limiting/ Succeeded: s/no one has used/no one will use/ Succeeded: s/whcih/which/ Found ScribeNick: joesteele Inferring Scribes: joesteele Default Present: markw, paulc, johnsim, joesteele, pal, pladd, davide, ddorwin, BobLund, JamilEllis, adrianba, [Microsoft], glenn Present: markw paulc johnsim joesteele pal pladd davide ddorwin BobLund JamilEllis adrianba [Microsoft] glenn Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2014Feb/0012.html Found Date: 18 Feb 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/02/18-html-media-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]