IRC log of mediafrag on 2011-09-07
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 09:01:35 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #mediafrag
- 09:01:35 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/07-mediafrag-irc
- 09:01:37 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 09:01:37 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #mediafrag
- 09:01:39 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be IA_MFWG
- 09:01:39 [Zakim]
- I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
- 09:01:40 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference
- 09:01:40 [trackbot]
- Date: 07 September 2011
- 09:02:54 [Zakim]
- ok, Yves; conference Team_(Mediafrag)09:02Z scheduled with code 26632 (CONF2) for 60 minutes until 1002Z
- 09:03:53 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/07-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael
- 09:04:01 [Zakim]
- Team_(Mediafrag)09:02Z has now started
- 09:04:09 [Zakim]
- + +33.4.93.00.aaaa
- 09:04:17 [raphael]
- Chair: Rapael
- 09:04:25 [raphael]
- s/Rapael/Raphael
- 09:04:41 [raphael]
- Regrets: Erik, Davy
- 09:04:47 [raphael]
- Scribe: raphael
- 09:04:52 [silvia]
- silvia has joined #mediafrag
- 09:05:15 [raphael]
- oups :-)
- 09:05:48 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/07-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael
- 09:05:48 [Zakim]
- +Bert
- 09:08:39 [Zakim]
- + +28012aabb
- 09:08:51 [silvia]
- zakim, aabb is me
- 09:08:51 [Zakim]
- +silvia; got it
- 09:09:00 [Zakim]
- + +1.404.978.aacc
- 09:09:24 [raphael]
- Topic: 1. ADMIN
- 09:09:39 [raphael]
- Yves will book zakim again until the end of the year
- 09:11:00 [raphael]
- Yves: I would like that the features at risk is explicit in the status section of the document
- 09:11:12 [raphael]
- ... in particular the entire section on which the group votes for keeping it or not
- 09:11:20 [raphael]
- PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the last telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/07/27-mediafrag-minutes.html
- 09:11:25 [tomayac]
- +1
- 09:11:27 [raphael]
- +1
- 09:11:28 [silvia]
- +1
- 09:11:29 [Yves]
- +1
- 09:11:32 [raphael]
- minutes accepted
- 09:11:40 [raphael]
- Topic: 2. SPEC
- 09:11:47 [raphael]
- ACTION-234?
- 09:11:47 [trackbot]
- ACTION-234 -- Thomas Steiner to review the "Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures" IETF draft -- due 2011-08-25 -- OPEN
- 09:11:47 [trackbot]
- http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/234
- 09:12:10 [raphael]
- Review: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Aug/0006.html
- 09:12:43 [raphael]
- Raphael: Thomas, could you send this review to IETF on behalf of the group
- 09:12:50 [tomayac]
- sure, will do
- 09:12:57 [raphael]
- close ACTION-234
- 09:12:57 [trackbot]
- ACTION-234 Review the "Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures" IETF draft closed
- 09:13:03 [raphael]
- ACTION-231?
- 09:13:03 [trackbot]
- ACTION-231 -- Yves Lafon to check if his grammar is in synch with the latest version of the spec -- due 2011-07-13 -- OPEN
- 09:13:03 [trackbot]
- http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/231
- 09:13:43 [raphael]
- Yves: will do it in 2 weeks
- 09:14:01 [raphael]
- Topic: 3. TEST CASES AND IMPLEMENTATIONS
- 09:14:22 [raphael]
- Raphael: we have the nightlies of Firefox
- 09:14:33 [raphael]
- ... we have a version of Opera but who has tested it?
- 09:14:54 [raphael]
- ... @foolip, how can we download a nightly to test your implementation?
- 09:14:58 [silvia]
- I didn't see it … sorry
- 09:15:04 [raphael]
- close ACTION-227
- 09:15:05 [trackbot]
- ACTION-227 Announce a link to a nightly implementing part of the media fragment spec closed
- 09:15:21 [foolip]
- There is no nightly, only the build I made at OVC last year
- 09:15:39 [raphael]
- ACTION-228?
- 09:15:39 [trackbot]
- ACTION-228 -- Thomas Steiner to develop the validator page using his js library for media fragments -- due 2011-07-20 -- OPEN
- 09:15:39 [trackbot]
- http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/actions/228
- 09:16:01 [silvia]
- @foolip: is it in the main trunk and will it become part of a release or are there no plans?
- 09:16:27 [foolip]
- it's on a branch, there are no immediate plans to do anything with it
- 09:17:07 [raphael]
- @foolip do you think you can made another build and share it with the group?
- 09:17:45 [raphael]
- Thomas: I have filled a entry for Chromium to get Media Frag implemented
- 09:17:52 [tomayac]
- http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=94368
- 09:18:03 [raphael]
- ... I will look internally who is the best person to lobby
- 09:19:12 [foolip]
- raphael, that would be a fair amount of work (making a proper desktop build), would it be valuable?
- 09:19:44 [tomayac]
- user script à la greasemonkey
- 09:19:53 [raphael]
- Thomas: I plan to turn my js library in a GreaseMonkey script that would make some browsers (Firefox, Chrome, Safari?) natively supporting media fragment
- 09:20:27 [raphael]
- @foolip we need to generate test report of existing implementations, so we will need to have some frozen versions at some point
- 09:20:42 [raphael]
- ... I understand that generating builds for multiple OS is a great amount of work
- 09:20:48 [raphael]
- ... how can we help?
- 09:21:01 [raphael]
- ... what is the plan of Opera to include it in the main trunk at some point?
- 09:21:03 [foolip]
- ok, for those purposes I think we can consider Opera's implementation to be non-existent for the time being
- 09:21:17 [foolip]
- and update it when there is an implementation released on the normal path
- 09:21:20 [silvia]
- zakim, mute me
- 09:21:20 [Zakim]
- silvia should now be muted
- 09:21:46 [foolip]
- if we don't go through proper integration, I can't get proper testing, so the results would reflect badly on us, most likely
- 09:22:38 [raphael]
- ok foolip, and you have a schedule plan for proper integration?
- 09:22:52 [raphael]
- Thomas: I will think more about the GreaseMonkey script
- 09:23:12 [raphael]
- Topic: 4. HTML5 Bugs
- 09:23:18 [raphael]
- See: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10723
- 09:23:45 [foolip]
- raphael, I'll be honest and say that MF is pretty far down the priority list for <video>, after things like <track>, WebRTC, adaptive streaming, multitrack and Audio API
- 09:24:28 [raphael]
- Raphael: I will re-open this bug
- 09:24:35 [foolip]
- We won't be taking the lead here, like I had initially hoped.
- 09:24:37 [raphael]
- ... based on Chris nightly implementation
- 09:25:59 [raphael]
- Topic: 5. AOB
- 09:26:14 [silvia]
- zakim, unmute me
- 09:26:14 [Zakim]
- silvia should no longer be muted
- 09:26:26 [raphael]
- Raphael: the main point of discussion now should be complete the test cases review and mainly generate test cases report
- 09:26:46 [raphael]
- ... so that we can see what is well implemented
- 09:26:59 [raphael]
- Silvia: we need now nice web page and applications that use media fragments
- 09:27:26 [raphael]
- ... liaise with video sharing platform?
- 09:27:46 [raphael]
- Thomas: I have an application accepted at the DeRiVE workshop
- 09:27:55 [raphael]
- ... that detects events in videos
- 09:28:21 [raphael]
- ... Raphael and me can brainstorm on a web site that showcase media fragment implementations
- 09:28:42 [raphael]
- ... including good and cool web sites
- 09:29:21 [raphael]
- ... People seem to focus on the temporal aspect only of the spec
- 09:29:30 [raphael]
- ... should we be worried?
- 09:29:43 [raphael]
- ... should we ultimately split the spec into temporal aspects vs other aspectS?
- 09:30:12 [raphael]
- Yves: I think you have a good point
- 09:30:27 [raphael]
- ... CSS is very keen to use Media Fragments for slicing
- 09:30:34 [silvia]
- zakim, mute me
- 09:30:34 [Zakim]
- silvia should now be muted
- 09:30:34 [raphael]
- ... we should focus on this part as well
- 09:31:31 [raphael]
- ... perhaps discuss with David Baron for Mozilla, ask Philip for Opera ... or ask Bert from W3C
- 09:33:05 [silvia]
- zakim, unmute me
- 09:33:05 [Zakim]
- silvia should no longer be muted
- 09:33:51 [raphael]
- Yves: if we have multiple partial implementations that all together cover the whole spec, this is fine if the group decides so
- 09:34:08 [raphael]
- ... for an audio client, this makes no sense to implement the spatial visual part
- 09:34:28 [raphael]
- Silvia: do we expect a browser to implement the whole spec or only some features?
- 09:34:35 [raphael]
- ... I think we should look for features
- 09:34:40 [raphael]
- Raphael: +1!
- 09:34:52 [tomayac]
- +1, silvia
- 09:35:06 [silvia]
- zakim, mute me
- 09:35:06 [Zakim]
- silvia should now be muted
- 09:35:11 [raphael]
- Silvia: we need e.g. 2 different implementations for the temporal features
- 09:35:59 [raphael]
- Raphael: other things you would like to discuss
- 09:36:11 [silvia]
- zakim, unmute me
- 09:36:11 [Zakim]
- silvia should no longer be muted
- 09:36:19 [Zakim]
- -Yves
- 09:36:30 [Zakim]
- -Thomas
- 09:36:31 [raphael]
- Silvia: I will publicize Media Fragments at OVC
- 09:36:32 [Zakim]
- -silvia
- 09:36:33 [Zakim]
- -raphael
- 09:36:34 [Zakim]
- Team_(Mediafrag)09:02Z has ended
- 09:36:35 [Zakim]
- Attendees were +33.4.93.00.aaaa, raphael, Yves, +28012aabb, silvia, +1.404.978.aacc, Thomas
- 09:36:36 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/07-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael
- 09:37:34 [raphael]
- ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
- 09:37:36 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/07-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael
- 12:00:43 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #mediafrag
- 13:09:49 [raphael]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 13:09:49 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items