HTML Media Task Force Teleconference

02 Jun 2015


See also: IRC log




<trackbot> Date: 02 June 2015

<scribe> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Jun/0009.html

<scribe> Scribenick: paulc

Action items



<trackbot> ACTION-84 -- Paul Cotton to (really rustamk) to update uses cases and arrange for further discussion -- due 2015-04-22 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/media/track/actions/84

Status: No progress and no report.



<trackbot> ACTION-86 -- David Dorwin to Send an update on bug 27269 -- due 2015-06-30 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/media/track/actions/86

David changed the due date to June 30 and was looking for other input.



<trackbot> ACTION-90 -- Paul Cotton to Update bug 20944 if the tf goes ahead with work on generic license request/response protocol -- due 2015-05-20 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/media/track/actions/90

<scribe> Pending.




<trackbot> Action-92 -- Paul Cotton to Build a generic wiki agenda for future tf meetings -- due 2015-04-23 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/media/track/actions/92

<scribe> Pending.



<trackbot> ACTION-93 -- Paul Cotton to Get in touch with webappsec wg about the "privileged context" which is more generic than saying https, etc." (really on bob lund) -- due 2015-05-26 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/media/track/actions/93

Bob Lund responded on June 1 that he is working on this with no firm completion date.

New MSE bugs

Three new bug 28710, 28727 and 27982 are MSE bugs

Bug 28710


Matt: This bug is about TrackBuffer and may be a duplicate.

Bug 28727


Matt: This one is interesting and is related to my work on Chromium. Related to Coded Frame Removal.
... I will follow up on this bug

Bug 27982


paulc: This is not new but is realted 28727.

Matt: I will take up this item since I will be looking at 28727.

MSE bugs (28557, 28573, 27239)

paulc: Matt - what is the progress here?

Matt: No progress on these since I have been working on Chromium problems and the CR test suite.

MSE test suite status

jdsmith: Can we prioritize the CR test suite to make some progress?

<MattWolenetz> paul, are you online?

paulc: Could Matt send out a test suite report so Jerry can get engaged and use the MSE tests on his implementation?

matt: yes and I am building a FAQ on how to use the existing tests

EME Issue-45

ISSUE-45: Remove "persistent-release-message" MediaKeySessionType

<trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-45 .


Mark: We agree to restore this at the F2F and I did my action item to provide text.
... David appears to be only one hesitant to put this feature back in.
... It was in the document for a long and there was no agreement to remove it.

paulc: Is this a disagreement about whether we put the feature back in and then fix it OR we get agreement on how to fix the feature before we put it back in.
... Is that a correct description David?

davidd: I am not yet convinced that it works or can be made to work across all clients.

markw: The group has NOT agreed to remove this feature and it is supported by other (non-Google) browers.
... I did the pull request four weeks ago and in the face of no agreement to remove this I would like this added back to the document.

paulc: Why can't you add this back and then mark it with issues?

davidd: Because people use its existence in the spec as proof that the feature has to be maintained.
... The text removal was small and we need to define this feature before we put it back.

markw: There is very little difference between what I have proposed and what was there before.

paulc: Let's continue this discussion for two weeks more and try to get a consensus on this feature. If we cannot I may be forced to recommend an action.

markw: I would like to suggest we have some sort of understanding on how to handle controversial changes. I would like to see change all done via pull requests that can be debated.

paulc: Maybe David can do a new summary of why he is concerned about this feature and that will permit others (other than markw) to catch up on the matter.

New EME issue



under active discussion

markw: our procedure need to be aligned with the privacy sections to follow the TAG advice

davidd: I agree with mark that we need to fix the normative text and we are figuring out how to do that

markw: Do you agree that the normative text should include the "inform the user" case?

davidd: I believe so but I am a little fuzzy on this.

markw: Q1; Is informing users an option at all?
... Q2: Do we need to contraint when that the informing users case is used?
... For Q2 I would prefer that the normative procedures include both cases of informing users and gaining consent and work separately on the case where the UI has a constraint?

<markw> Q2: should explicit consent be required when the UI for clearing identifier si not good enough

davidd: The word RECOMMENDED (not required) is used and partially covers the case.

<markw> Here is my latest proposal: If the User Agent requires explicit user consent for the use of Distinctive Identifiers and if there is no persisted consent covering accumulated configuration for the origin, request user consent to use Distinctive Identifier(s).

davidd: not sure how to remove the RECOMMENDED word without leaving a hole
... I do agree with the first case and would prefer to get it all right at once
... I will reply in the bug

markw: I am concerned that the act of defining if a UI is sufficient may drag on the solution for too long.
... I would like to get this done ASAP rather than dragging this out

davidd: I want to take the text and turn it into algorithmic text

markw: <missed text>

davidd; <missed answer>

paulc: I suggest we take this into ISSUE-63 and try to get this done ASAP.

<markw> My concern is that making normative procedures contingent on the nature of the user interface is unusual and could cause this to drag out

ISSUE-57 thru ISSUE-62

We go email consensus on these new issues this week.

Next meeting

Paul is travelling next week and cannot chair.

<markw> If we can solve this quickly, by reference to existing text, that would be great, but if not I'd prefer to address the main issue of the mismatch between the Privacy section and the normative procedures first

Could we meet in two weeks on Jun 16?

Matt: fine with me

markw: Sure

davidd: oka

jdsmith: okay

So we will meet on Jun 16 and do both MSE and EME at that meeting.

Automatic publishing on TR for EME

davidd: no progress on this

paulc; should I reach out to Robin for help?

davidd: sure

<scribe> ACTION: paul to get Robin's assistance to turn out automatic publishing on /TR for EME Editor's draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/06/02-html-media-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-94 - Get robin's assistance to turn out automatic publishing on /tr for eme editor's draft [on Paul Cotton - due 2015-06-09].

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: paul to get Robin's assistance to turn out automatic publishing on /TR for EME Editor's draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/06/02-html-media-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/06/02 15:53:49 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found ScribeNick: paulc
Inferring Scribes: paulc

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: ISSUE-45 Mark MattWolenetz Microsoft Q2 Scribenick Status aaaa davidd ddorwin html-media https jdsmith joined markw matt paulc trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Jun/0009.html
Found Date: 02 Jun 2015
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/06/02-html-media-minutes.html
People with action items: paul

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]