See also: IRC log
<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
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
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
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
<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
paulc: issues 19, 14, 31
… looks like 19 needs feedback
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/19
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
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
<paulc> Issue-63: Align normative text on user consent for Distinctive Identifiers with privacy section
<trackbot> Notes added to Issue-63 .
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/63
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/pull/66
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
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/45
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/45
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/pull/54
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
+1
ddorwin: ok with me
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/45
https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/pull/65
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
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.
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]