See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 11 March 2009
<raphael> yves, are joi joining?
<raphael> Scribe: Jack
<raphael> scribenick: jackjansen
<raphael> accept the minutes: http://www.w3.org/2009/03/04-mediafrag-minutes.html ?
<mhausenblas> +1
<davy> +1
<scribe> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Mar/0029.html
all: accepted
resolved: 44
RESOLUTION: 44
<raphael> close ACTION-44
<trackbot> ACTION-44 Take care of zakim bridge for F2F closed
raphael: next issue: meeting at TPAC or not? Maybe we don't want to fly there in November, too expensive?
Silvia: I probably won't make it
Thierry: annotations WG probably will meet
Raphael: suggests we meet at a
cheaper place. Hotels in California are more expensive, and
there's a fee too.
... next topic: teleconf time. Heads up that next weeks
teleconf is an hour early too.
Silvia: back to f2f: maybe I can arrange something through csiro?
Raphael: lets postpone discussion to Barcelona. For now main point is meeting at TPAC or not (to meet other groups)
<raphael> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-reqs/
raphael: some people seem to have CVS problems.
Silvia: yes, I do.
raphael: various people have no problems.
<tmichel> I have also sent an email to the system about checking in documents
<nessy> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-reqs/
<erik> Erik: still problem (probably authentication issue)
Silvia: where is the document?
Michael: overview.html
Raphael: html does not match xml. Needs to be processed by stylesheet.
<raphael> Thierry has filled the section 3, I will checked it in
Raphael: cvs up should give you
updated documents
... back to syntax.
<raphael> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/42785/MFRAGSYNTAXSEGMENT/
Raphael: The questionaire.
... Everyone happy with segment, which has the majority?
<mhausenblas> +1
<raphael> close ACTION-45
<trackbot> ACTION-45 Erik And Raphael to set up a questionnaire to find a name for the top level Media Fragment production rule closed
yves: does this also change the other production names?
Raphael: I think so. xxxfragment
becomes xxxsegment for any xxx.
... Action 46 is ongoing.
yves: had no time to work on it. In another f2f.
Silvia: working on it, seems ok so far.
Topic 2.3: existing technology.
s/Topic 2.3: Topic: 2.3
erik: only need to do copying.
<raphael> close ACTION-23
<trackbot> ACTION-23 (together with Jean-Pierre) to add TV-Anytime also to Existing Technologies Survey closed
<raphael> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/HTTP_implementation
Raphael: need to use real media.
Jack suggests using prerecorded video from Nice
... Does current text capture intention?
Yves: think so, need to check
Silvia: me too
Raphael: need to fill pro+con section, especially caching.
<raphael> Jack: suggest to flip the examples ... 4-ways handshake is better equiped to have different ranges
<raphael> ... while the 2-ways handshakes might return exactly what the UA has requested, and the UA will need to do an extra clipping
<raphael> Yves: multi mime answer?
<raphael> Jack: we do continuous segments or not?
<raphael> Raphael: see the issue page http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/Issues#Continuity_.2F_Discontinuity
Silvia: I want to reopen the
discussion on 2way 4way
... maybe at next f2f.
<raphael> Raphael: agree to make it a major topic of our next telecon
Silvia: not reopen, more like clarify.
<Yves> btw: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-06
Raphael: Silvia, can you write an email with your comments?
Silvia: better to have everyone read it, and discuss it in 2 weeks time
Raphael: ok.
Silvia: will miss next week:
product lunch
... (OR LAUNCH??)
<nessy> yeah, product launch :)
Raphael: Yves, what is the url you posted above?
(offtopic: too bad, lunch seems more fun)
Raphael: it's mandatory reading for everyone.
Raphael: do we need to update mimetype registrations?
Michael: not necessary for first
draft. I haven't done anything yet, but please keep it
open.
... will come with proposal after talking to various
people.
<raphael> +1 for Michael
<nessy> +1
Raphael: ok, should we keep it on agenda?
Michael: don't care
Raphael: on to issue 4. Track names.
Silvia: I'm both pro and con,
actually.
... con because its up to the containerr
... pro because it's handy from user pov
<raphael> Jack: I'm also pro and con
<raphael> ... I'm against it at this point in time
<raphael> ... I'm afraid we standardize it incorrectly
<raphael> ... we are going more in the metadata field
<raphael> Raphael: agree, we might need more expertise and postpone that later
<raphael> Jack: I suggest we study it more, particularly the WAI
<raphael> Raphael: should we try to invite some of them in a telecon?
Raphael: I'll put it on the
agenda for the next cross-wg teleconf with them
... but after first working draft.
<raphael> Jack: yes, but put a paragraph explaining the rationale in the WD
<raphael> +1
<nessy> +1
<davy> +1
Raphael: nothing on
implementation. AOB?
... Nothing? Ok.
... Everyone needs to read http document.
... Also: everyone take care we copy all info to wd.
Michael: asks Yves to give occasional updates on httpbis
Yves: info is publicly available in minutes.
raphael, are you doing the magic?
Ah, yves does.