HTML Media Task Force Teleconference

07 Jul 2015


See also: IRC log


markw, joesteele, Plh, plh, BobLund, davide, adrianba, paulc, ddorwin, cwilso


<trackbot> Date: 07 July 2015

<paulc> Media TF is now using Webex: https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/Media_Task_Force/Call

<paulc> Each TF participant on the call should enter "present+" so that we have a log of participants.

<paulc> Media TF is now using Webex: https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/Media_Task_Force/Call

<scribe> scribenick: joesteele

<paulc> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Jul/0009.html

Open Action Items

paulc: David you had an open action — you need an extension?

ddorwin: yes - I extended

<paulc> ACTION-86?

<trackbot> ACTION-86 -- David Dorwin to Send an update on bug 27269 -- due 2015-07-31 -- OPEN

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

<paulc> ACTION-93?

<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

paulc: we had a response yesterday from BobLund

… about the priviledged context

<paulc> See Bob's update in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Jul/0007.html

Implemented Issues since June 2nd

paulc: there was an update since the agenda

<paulc> Issues 12, 15, 30, 34, 36, 39, 43, 44, 49, 51, 56 and 58 have been implemented

… believe issue 20 and 8 have been updated

<paulc> Issue 20 and issue 8 have also been implemented

jdsmith: yes, implemented

Issues to be implemented

paulc: I created a list to be sure we knew what is blocked

… looks like 17, 10, 9, 8 and 2

<paulc> ISSUE-17 Replace "fire a simple event" with "fire an event" for non-simple Events, Assigned to Jerry

paulc: lets discuss this one

<paulc> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/17

… Jerry had a question

<paulc> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/17#issuecomment-119042652

jdsmith: I want to be sure I know what a “complex” event is

… I interepreted to be ones with attributes, not sure how that is different from simple events

… this looks effectively the same

ddorwin: I interpreted this as just being the base interface and not appropo for other events

… would like input from others on whether this is correct

paulc: what do you mean?

ddorwin: if fire an event means fire an “Event” then it is not correct for the other text. This would clean that up

jdsmith: probably need to clarify this more

<paulc> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/webappapis.html#fire-a-simple-event

paulc: I was looking for that text in the webappis spec

ddorwin: we should find out what a “simple event” is

jdsmith: having trouble finding the example now

paulc: does the text “simple event” occur elsewhere?

<ddorwin> The question is whether "simple event" means exactly "Event" or can include children of Event (with additional members).

paulc: “simple event” by itself is never defined

ddorwin: that refers to “Event”

… the Event interface

jdsmith: an alternate example under sourcing tracks is step 9

<paulc> Step 9 of http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/embedded-content-0.html#sourcing-in-band-text-tracks

paulc: should we handle offline?

… or discuss more now?

jdsmith: would like some guidance here — what is the right model?

paulc: what are the key questions then?

ddorwin: the one I posted above

… the term “simple event” is from webapp Apis

<plh> http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/webappapis.html#fire-a-simple-event

paulc: maybe sending a request to public-html about this would answer it
... there are two issues with no assigned editors (10 and 2)

… markw can you take one or both

ddorwin: 2 is actually assigned to me

markw: I can take issue-10 then

Initialization Data cluster

<paulc> ISSUE-41 blocks ISSUE-52 and ISSUE-53

paulc: includes issue-41 which blocks 52/53

… been like this for awhile

paulc: you said you would file an additional bug and you did that, no progress since then

<paulc> https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/41#issuecomment-97124407 give status after the Mar F2F meeting

<paulc> Joe: ISSUE-52 should be processable

<paulc> Daivd: I disagree

ddorwin: these need to be worked on as a whole and that has not happened yet
... we have been focusing on some issues (like secure release) but we need to prioritize

paulc: we have not met for a month, the work done has been stuff already marked as to be done (for a long time)

… we need to make progress on the hard issues

ddorwin: we have been making progress, eg. secure release which is why the others have not been getting attention

paulc: the chair requests Joe to figure out a strategy for this cluster

Event Handler and Message cluster

paulc: issues 19, 14, 31

… looks like 19 needs feedback


paulc: can we get a volunteer to give feedback for 19 and 14 to break this cluster

jdsmith: I will do that

paulc: what is your timeline?

jdsmith: shoot for two weeks

Examples cluster

paulc: issues 34 and 10

… maybe these need to just be assigned to an editor

… is there any technical discussion?

markw: 34 is done and I took on 10

paulc: thanks

Issue-63: Align normative text on user consent for Distinctive Identifiers with privacy section

<paulc> Issue-63: Align normative text on user consent for Distinctive Identifiers with privacy section

<trackbot> Notes added to Issue-63 .



paulc: you created this 21 days ago — what do we do with this?

ddorwin: I need to review that one — must have missed it. I will take an action

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




paulc: lot of discussion in this one

<paulc> EME] Netflix's secure release is unreliable without tamper-proof secure persistent storage and/or delayed shutdown

… and a separate email thread

<paulc> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Jun/0021.html

… message 21 in the June archive

paulc: what do we do next here?

ddorwin: working on documenting the key renewal which has been blocking this

jdsmith: that was an alternative David raised in previous discussions

ddorwin: the issue is very different now than what is being discussed, this is all about secure release

joesteele: seems that the core issue is that some platforms may not be able to support this or is very difficult, and whether we should allow such features

markw: seems like that would be a good question to answer even if I disagree about whether it is implementable

… I find it unlikely that there are platforms where the write required is not possible

ddorwin: this is an architectural constraint that this feature places on the spec which is a web of other constraints

… I also think you cannot define that behavior in terms of other core specs

… I think you *can* write this in the spec, but the question is whether the web spec should constrain implementations this way

markw: I think this is a web agent arhcitecural issue, not a web architecture issue

… might be missing something and we need to dive deeper

… but I am happy to see the alternatives and see whether they solve all the uses cases, or maybe support both

paulc: more discussion now?

… or wait for davids proposal


ddorwin: ok with me

Issue-22: Add output-restricted MediaKeyStatus



ddorwin: discussing with Mark now, was a little confused

… do you want “downscaled” as well now?

markw: could have either “op blocked” or “downscaled” states, to avoid discarding the high resolution data downloaded

dorwin: was a bit confused about the last line, will re-read now and respond

… will make the proposal more concise and we can move from there

… updating the issue

Next meeting

paulc: suggest we meet on July 21st

jdsmith: ok

… alternating between MSE and EME seems like the way to go

paulc: ok — we are done.

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/07/07 15:55:34 $

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)

Succeeded: s/Action Item/Action Items/
Succeeded: s/in the spec/in the webappis spec/
Succeeded: s/occurs elsewhere/occur elsewhere/
Succeeded: s/children of Event/children of Event (with additional members)/
Succeeded: s/10 and 2/(10 and 2)/
Succeeded: s/.. do you/… do you/
Succeeded: s/Issue 63, Pull reuest 66/Issue-63: Align normative text on user consent for Distinctive Identifiers with privacy section/
Succeeded: s/ISSUE-45:/Issue-45:/
Succeeded: s/tehcnical/technical/
Succeeded: s/archove/archive/
Succeeded: s/liek/like/
Succeeded: s/ or is very difficult/ or is very difficult, and whether we should allow such features/
Succeeded: s/imeplemtations/implementations/
Succeeded: s/write this,/write this in the spec,/
Succeeded: s/either prevented or downscaled states/either “op blocked” or “downscaled” states/
Succeeded: s/Initialization Data cluster of issues/Initialization Data cluster/
Found ScribeNick: joesteele
Inferring Scribes: joesteele
Present: markw joesteele Plh plh BobLund davide adrianba paulc ddorwin cwilso
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Jul/0009.html
Found Date: 07 Jul 2015
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/07/07-html-media-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]