00:00:12 <kaz> ... don't understand why you exclude them
00:00:39 <kaz> ... if we think XMLHTTPRequest is important, we should include it as well
00:01:09 <kaz> mav: we should describe "the HNTF is following the following key gaps"
00:01:25 <kaz> giusepp: we don't know there is a gap
00:01:34 <kaz> igarashi: can live with that
00:01:38 <kaz> jan: there is a gap
00:01:53 <kaz> ... XMLHTTPRequest, etc., are server-side
00:02:25 <kaz> ... not necessarilly client-side, but we should be able to consider server-side
00:02:32 <kaz> igarashi: that might be a gap
00:02:42 <kaz> ... but we can consider WebSockets as well
00:02:52 <kaz> ... both side are clients
00:02:56 <kaz> s/side/sides/
00:03:22 <kaz> jc: if you implement service advertizement, you implement eplosure, capability to receive actions
00:03:32 <kaz> ... and to reply
00:03:36 <kaz> ... HTTP daemon
00:03:56 <kaz> jan: I'd see a use case
00:04:18 <kaz> clarke: have implementation
00:04:26 <kaz> giuseppe: would see resolution
00:04:53 <kaz> ... let's see "Next Steps" section
00:05:16 <kaz> ... heard some concerns from somebody in the group
00:05:34 <kaz> mav: we have an opportunity during TPAC 2011
00:05:56 <kaz> ... to talk about with the other groups, e.g., HTML WG, Device APIs
00:05:59 <MattH> MattH has joined #webtv
00:06:03 <kaz> ... with a focus on the gaps
00:06:22 <kaz> jerry: think the home network is related to device APIs
00:06:39 <MattH> s/related to/more than/
00:06:50 <kaz> ... close these gaps within home network environment
00:07:33 <kaz> ... need a group for HTML5 for home network
00:07:51 <kaz> igarashi: SONY also express our preference to have a separate group
00:08:13 <kaz> ... we don't need to open a big umbrella like "Device APIs"
00:08:39 <kaz> ... this APIs could be discussed within the existing Device APIs WG
00:08:45 <Jerry> correction home networking not related to device api's
00:08:46 <kaz> ... but we should have a separate group
00:09:31 <kaz> jeff: there has to be good discussion within the IG
00:09:43 <kaz> ... including Web browser vendors
00:10:01 <kaz> ... we called the AC Rep
00:10:10 <kaz> ... (looking at David Singer)
00:10:29 <dsinger> ...who looks away, waving his hands....
00:10:53 <kaz> ... would like opinion from Chris on the topic list
00:12:21 <kaz> igarashi: giuseppe, if DeviceAPI or another new group discuss this topic, how that group should treat with this
00:12:25 <kaz> s/this/this?/
00:12:39 <kaz> giuseppe: we start from gaps
00:12:58 <kaz> igarashi: the group also should start with gaps?
00:13:00 <kaz> giuseppe: yes
00:13:11 <kaz> jerry: my concern is we've identified gaps
00:13:22 <kaz> ... but not identified all the requirements yet
00:13:50 <kaz> ... if we hand these gaps to an independent group, would it be ok?
00:14:00 <kaz> giuseppe: the group should include ourselves
00:14:18 <kaz> ... a WG should be a better place for detailed technical discussion
00:14:37 <kaz> ... out of time...
00:15:12 <kaz> mav: could we rephraze and say "we have these gaps"?
00:15:43 <kaz> giuseppe: we might want to have discussion by key participants
00:16:11 <kaz> jan: I did scanned the text but not sure about communication of service
00:16:24 <kaz> giuseppe: would encourage people to have offline discussion
00:16:37 <kaz> ... think we're done for today
00:16:50 <kaz> clarke: and see you tomorrow for MPTF at 9am
00:17:15 <kaz> giuseppe: tx
00:17:39 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
00:17:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/22-webtv-minutes.html kaz
00:18:10 <kaz> s/think the home network is related to device APIs/think the home network is not related to device APIs/
00:18:23 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
00:18:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/22-webtv-minutes.html kaz
00:19:07 <kaz> Meeting: Web and TV Interest Group Hollywood F2F Meeting - Day 1
00:19:09 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
00:19:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/22-webtv-minutes.html kaz
00:33:36 <W3C1> W3C1 has joined #webtv
00:36:14 <davidmays> davidmays has joined #webtv
00:40:40 <davidmays> davidmays has left #webtv
01:25:23 <mav> mav has joined #webtv
01:51:47 <mav> mav has joined #webtv
02:08:41 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #webtv
02:18:30 <Alan> Alan has joined #webtv
02:23:06 <Zakim> Zakim has left #webtv
04:10:47 <mav_> mav_ has joined #webtv
05:06:37 <duncanr> duncanr has joined #webtv
05:07:08 <duncanr> duncanr has left #webtv
05:33:19 <W3C1> W3C1 has joined #webtv
16:06:37 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webtv
16:06:37 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/22-webtv-irc
16:07:04 <truth> truth has joined #webtv
16:07:20 <yosuke> yosuke has joined #webtv
16:07:53 <giuseppe> Topic: ISSUE-40
16:08:01 <giuseppe> content protection
16:08:37 <giuseppe> clarke: [read the issue description]
16:08:49 <bryan> bryan has joined #webtv
16:08:54 <davidmays> davidmays has joined #webtv
16:08:59 <giuseppe> ...what needs to be standardized?
16:09:06 <bryan> present+ Bryan_Sullivan
16:09:07 <giuseppe> ... we tried to make such a list
16:09:14 <okubo> okubo has joined #webtv
16:09:16 <davidmays1> davidmays1 has joined #webtv
16:09:25 <Juhani> Juhani has joined #webtv
16:09:51 <Kiyoko> Kiyoko has joined #webtv
16:09:57 <giuseppe> bob: the idea is that  today we can use object element to play protected content
16:10:00 <HJ_Lee> HJ_Lee has joined #webtv
16:10:07 <giuseppe> but this does not allow to take advatnage of the media element
16:10:12 <kaz> kaz has joined #webtv
16:10:51 <giuseppe> ... we would like to make sure the media element can do whatever is needed to play protected content
16:10:58 <giuseppe> david: I don't understand what's the problem
16:11:02 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
16:11:07 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:11:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/22-webtv-minutes.html kaz
16:11:15 <jongyoul> jongyoul has joined #webtv
16:11:17 <giuseppe> .. there is no restriction for the video element to only play unprotected content
16:11:31 <giuseppe> bob: that is partially tru but there are a couple of limitations
16:11:55 <giuseppe> one is you can only make use of the protection mechanisms embeddede into the user agent
16:12:35 <giuseppe> another limitation: there is no way for web content to pass any parameters to the ua to control content protection
16:12:48 <sunghan> sunghan has joined #webtv
16:12:56 <giuseppe> also there are not defined error messages that notify about issues for content protections
16:13:10 <kaz> Meeting: Web and TV Interest Group Hollywood F2F Meeting - Day 2
16:13:12 <giuseppe> e.g. you cannot play this becuase you don't have enough rights
16:14:04 <jihan> jihan has joined #webtv
16:14:04 <narm_gadiraju> narm_gadiraju has joined #webtv
16:14:10 <kaz> i/Topic: ISSUE-40/topic: AM1: Media Pipeline Task Force (Clarke) /
16:14:35 <giuseppe> s/david/dsinger/
16:14:45 <giuseppe> dsinger: are you asking fro a pluggable DRM?
16:15:02 <wii> wii has joined #webtv
16:15:06 <giuseppe> this is behind the scope of html
16:15:54 <giuseppe> mark: the idea is to have a video that can be extended for drm or for other reasons (e.g. additional codecs)
16:16:59 <giuseppe> what we are trying to do is to move what we are able to to with <object> with <video> (for media content)
16:17:16 <giuseppe> so we don't need to use <object> anymore
16:17:41 <giuseppe> and we can make use of all the featurs of <video> like multitracks, captions etc
16:18:30 <eric> eric has joined #webtv
16:18:48 <giuseppe> we have two ways to work with protected content
16:19:07 <giuseppe> 1) you can only play what the UA support
16:19:17 <igarashi> igarashi has joined #webtv
16:19:40 <giuseppe> this could work but is still a burden to support multiple DRM/UAs
16:19:47 <giuseppe> for content providers
16:20:59 <giuseppe> dsinger: we didn't agree on codecs, will be much harder for drm (impossible?)
16:21:16 <giuseppe> .. I think is really hard
16:21:53 <giuseppe> mv: we are aware of this problem but we should give it a try and be ambitious
16:21:59 <Jerry> Jerry has joined #webtv
16:22:13 <Russell_Berkoff> Russell_Berkoff has joined #webtv
16:22:23 <giuseppe> mark watson (mw): we should do a step at time
16:23:06 <giuseppe> ... we should start with an API to talk with the platform
16:23:22 <giuseppe> and than discuss about a need for a plugin infrastructure
16:24:04 <giuseppe> clarke: how can we do this? is there a consensus ?
16:24:29 <giuseppe> bob: I hear is difficult but not that is not needed
16:25:08 <giuseppe> jon: there are some things that are less contentions, more obvious
16:25:18 <giuseppe> is this a priority list?
16:25:20 <giuseppe> clarke: no
16:25:38 <giuseppe> jon: thn maybe we should focus on the issues where we are more in agreement
16:25:44 <giuseppe> and highlight them
16:26:09 <SergeySl> SergeySl has joined #webtv
16:26:38 <giuseppe> because if we go into TPAC with too many requirement and not agreed we may not be able to influence the html w
16:26:48 <giuseppe> s/html w/html wg/
16:27:10 <giuseppe> jan: agree, we should focus on our main goals
16:28:00 <giuseppe> dsinger: maybe we haven't formulated the problem well and we should highlight more specificly what is missing
16:28:15 <giuseppe> since te simple claim "you cannot play protected content" is not true
16:28:32 <giuseppe> but of course there are pieces missing, and we should focus on these pieces
16:29:07 <giuseppe> mw: we should probably remove the plugin part rather than just downprioritize
16:29:33 <giuseppe> I'm not sure if we all agree what we mean for UA
16:29:42 <giuseppe> and which part are part of the UA and which one are not
16:29:46 <dcorvoysier> I completely agree with mark just said
16:30:16 <giuseppe> clarke: I still think is a goal
16:30:22 <giuseppe> mw: I don't think it is
16:31:27 <giuseppe> @@@:  we seems to be in the same situation as before
16:31:40 <giuseppe> there are some key gaps and some additional requirements
16:31:55 <yosuke> s/@@@/Ted/
16:32:00 <giuseppe> maybe we should really show why what we have today is not working for you
16:32:20 <giuseppe> mav: I agree there are priorities
16:34:18 <giuseppe> but from a content person PoV if we could have a standard way to access the same information via the <video> element, even on different platforms
16:34:52 <giuseppe> mw: I think we should not specify <object> <embed> is too detailed
16:35:01 <giuseppe> we should discus on a higher level
16:35:26 <giuseppe> and consider how do you do it as a second step in the discussion
16:36:25 <giuseppe> jan: this list is what we need to standardize
16:36:45 <giuseppe> <object> do not require anything to be standardized
16:37:00 <giuseppe> so we should probably remove it from the list
16:37:28 <giuseppe> dcorvoysier: which platform you have in mind?
16:37:35 <giuseppe> for embedded you cannot install plugins
16:37:56 <giuseppe> clarke: I think we need to rephrase it, maybe there is confusion
16:38:04 <jcverdie> jcverdie has joined #webtv
16:39:04 <giuseppe> ... point 3: common API to pass parameters to the drm system (on the platform)
16:39:10 <giuseppe> provide events
16:39:32 <giuseppe> jan: I would like to add more like being able to list drm supported
16:39:55 <giuseppe> and I would nlike to show some api work we have done in OIPF
16:40:09 <giuseppe> clarke: maybe we can do it later
16:40:11 <Fuhrhop> s/nlike/like/
16:40:22 <giuseppe> mw: I think point 3 is the key point
16:40:41 <giuseppe> and shows what is missing
16:41:03 <giuseppe> i.e. that you can now play protected content but not in a generic way
16:41:13 <giuseppe> you need to write specific code fro specific protection system
16:41:29 <giuseppe> clarke: point 4
16:41:45 <giuseppe> provide common interface for authentication
16:42:00 <giuseppe> mw: what is missing here?
16:42:38 <giuseppe> bob: we have heard during the workshop that you want to identify the user to be able to know if the user can play content
16:42:56 <giuseppe> mw: I think you can do it already with existing technologies
16:43:02 <giuseppe> for application and user
16:43:22 <giuseppe> for device authentication maybe there is something missing
16:43:28 <giuseppe> but that is a different discussion
16:43:37 <giuseppe> jan: agree
16:46:11 <giuseppe> jon: maybe if we step away from requirements
16:46:32 <giuseppe> and we focus on scenarios and show what we cannot do today would be more effective
16:46:41 <giuseppe> maybe show some examples
16:47:18 <giuseppe> is also important to distinguish between authentication and autorization
16:48:09 <bryan> q+ to ask if this is really device or user being authenticated, and if device, which device ?
16:48:42 <Iraj> Iraj has joined #webtv
16:48:47 <giuseppe> mw:  there is an identity in the browser ws 
16:48:53 <giuseppe> around tpac
16:49:04 <giuseppe> that could be the right venue to discuss this
16:50:09 <giuseppe> in this environment we need to understand what is identity in this contest and what we need this identity for  
16:50:22 <giuseppe> in many usecases knowing the type of device is enough
16:50:33 <giuseppe> bryan: this is a multilayer thing
16:50:43 <giuseppe> I agree we need to understand the objective here
16:50:56 <giuseppe> need to clarify what we want to achieve
16:51:16 <giuseppe> not only describing what we would like to have but also for what we need it for
16:51:29 <JanL> JanL has joined #webtv
16:52:14 <johnsim> johnsim has joined #webtv
16:52:24 <HJ_Lee> HJ_Lee has joined #webtv
16:52:44 <giuseppe> jan: would like to have an action for use to describe this scenarios and maybe aim for the workshop that mw was talking about to discuss these scenarios
16:52:58 <giuseppe> ted: we have login mechanisms in our services
16:53:09 <giuseppe> we are doing it without any additional technology
16:53:44 <giuseppe> so if we ask extra features we really need to be clear what is the problem we are asking to be solved
16:53:49 <bryan> re multilayer, there is identity (various), authenticity of the identity, authorization of service to the identity (e.g. user) and in context with other identities (e.g. device)
16:54:03 <giuseppe> clarke: ok move on point 4
16:54:10 <giuseppe> s(point 4/point 5
16:55:03 <giuseppe> ... how the server knows which level of protection the UA support?
16:55:13 <giuseppe> is the UA string enough?
16:55:29 <giuseppe> bryan: no, is definitively not enough 
16:55:49 <giuseppe> mw: if you don't know if you can trust the device
16:55:53 <giuseppe> you cannot rely on the header
16:56:05 <giuseppe> and if you instead already indetified the device and know that you can trust it
16:56:14 <giuseppe> than you already know what you need to know
16:57:33 <bryan> UA is not granular enough. User Agent Profile (UAProf, defined in the OMA) based upon CC/PP, does provide detailed info but is static and any customization of the device post-manufacture requires dynamic info of its current capabilities. In OMA we have defined the Device Profile Evolution (DPE) enabler to provide this dynamic capabilties info.
16:58:42 <Russell_Berkoff> CC/PP == http://www.w3.org/Mobile/CCPP/    ??
16:58:56 <giuseppe> jan: presenting OIPF API for drm support
17:00:12 <giuseppe> mw: what kind of information these APIs conveys?
17:00:42 <giuseppe> jan: it depends on the DRM systems, this is just a channel for the application to talk to the drm
17:00:47 <bryan> Yes
17:02:31 <giuseppe> jon: so this do not replace the communicatin between the drm agent on the platform and the server
17:04:10 <giuseppe> mw:I think we should aim for a different approach instead
17:04:32 <giuseppe> use a similar mechanism but use the drm agent on the platform only to pass information from the application to the server
17:04:51 <bryan> q+ to request that flows be developed to illustrate how DRM messages can be tunneled through this API
17:06:01 <giuseppe> mw: if we allow the application to be responsible to manage the communication to the server would be more flexible
17:06:15 <giuseppe> otherwise we need to include that loginc in different drm component
17:07:29 <giuseppe> bryan: I think we should not start with an API but more describe which information we want to tunnel
17:07:38 <giuseppe> which one is the flow, we should describe it
17:07:48 <giuseppe> how the application forward information to the server
17:08:08 <giuseppe> mw: I described it in berlin
17:08:27 <giuseppe> jan: so we complement each other
17:09:00 <giuseppe> jon: re tunneling messages 
17:09:07 <giuseppe> this is what silverlight does today
17:09:12 <giuseppe> but is not a pulic spec of course
17:10:09 <giuseppe> I think is good to try to visualize what we need, we should try to capture the requirements we need the html to consider
17:10:39 <giuseppe> so if we want ask for this kind of tunneling to be supported we should say that
17:10:51 <bryan> q-
17:11:45 <giuseppe> jan:  showing one more slide about decide identity
17:11:56 <giuseppe> s/decide/device/
17:12:54 <giuseppe> [discussing limitation of the presented approach]
17:13:16 <giuseppe> clarke: so is important to identify the device?
17:13:44 <giuseppe> jan: is for the server to identify the device and generate a key for that platform
17:14:36 <giuseppe> bob: drm systems have their own way to identify devices, don't they?
17:14:59 <giuseppe> how does this work with these different identity mechanisms?
17:15:19 <giuseppe> mw: I think we need to stay away from the "unique" identifier
17:15:24 <giuseppe> it just needs to be consitent
17:15:49 <giuseppe> how to you guarantee the device id sent by the app can be trsuted?
17:15:59 <giuseppe> do you rely on the drm system on the platform?
17:16:10 <giuseppe> jan: yes
17:16:17 <giuseppe> mw: so I'm not sure this is sufficient
17:16:44 <giuseppe> would be useful to have a capability to identify the device independently from the drm
17:17:32 <franck> s/trsuted/trusted
17:18:42 <giuseppe> jan: by identifying the drm systems you will know the requirement on the platform
17:18:51 <giuseppe> becuase drm systems have specifi requirements for devices
17:20:07 <giuseppe> jon: there are needs for device identification in some use cases that proceed any dialog with the drm system on the platform
17:20:26 <giuseppe> so there is use for a device identification outside the drm
17:21:00 <giuseppe> s/outside/separated by/
17:21:22 <giuseppe> at least it should be logically separated
17:21:34 <giuseppe> in some cases may be implemented on top of the drm
17:21:43 <giuseppe> but this is just one way to implement it
17:22:55 <giuseppe> so the specification should provide a way to identify the device but not bind it to a specific way to do it
17:23:27 <giuseppe> bob: I think mw and jon are talking of 2 different pieces of information
17:24:58 <giuseppe> [scribe missed jon comment]
17:26:24 <giuseppe> bryan: if you have got an embedded solution, this could work, but is you can customize the device you have the riskj that the capabilities may change
17:26:52 <giuseppe> if you are using capabilities to decide if you can trust that device
17:27:25 <giuseppe> mw: it depends which information you are looking at, there could be some features that are "hard" to change and could be used for this purpose
17:28:30 <giuseppe> clarke: there seems to be consensus that we can drop itme 2 and 4 and include the key points for these items in item 1 and 3
17:29:12 <giuseppe> russell: what about protecting personal content? 
17:29:28 <giuseppe> clarke: ok thanks we will consider that
17:29:45 <giuseppe> clarke: coffee brake nowm than adaptive streaming
17:32:15 <masao_> masao_ has joined #webtv
17:40:22 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:40:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/22-webtv-minutes.html kaz
17:41:21 <kaz> topic: AM2: Media Pipeline Task Force (Clarke) - Adaptive Streaming
17:41:26 <kaz> scribenick: kaz
17:42:00 <masao__> masao__ has joined #webtv
17:55:18 <kensaku> kensaku has joined #webtv
18:01:53 <kaz> clarke: before going into adaptive streaming, can we get agreement?
18:02:24 <kaz> -> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions/Delivery_in_distribution_windows ISSUE-40
18:03:17 <kaz> clarke: so that we can bring them to TPAC
18:03:36 <kaz> ... the first is provide Web content with common interace to content protection
18:03:58 <young> young has joined #webtv
18:04:01 <Youngsun> Youngsun has joined #webtv
18:04:08 <kaz> jan: point number 2...
18:04:36 <kaz> ... level of protection the DRM system provide
18:04:59 <kaz> ...I'd suggest number 2 should also be moved down
18:05:20 <kaz> bob: just providing information
18:05:38 <kaz> jan: might need more work on use cases
18:06:43 <kaz> action: clarke to modify the text on what needs to be standardized item 2
18:06:44 <trackbot> Created ACTION-79 - Modify the text on what needs to be standardized item 2 [on Clarke Stevens - due 2011-09-29].
18:06:58 <kaz> igarashi: number 1 of item 1
18:07:05 <kaz> ... how to pass parameter
18:07:38 <kaz> ... DRM license acquisition assumed?
18:07:49 <kaz> clarke: nothing is assumed
18:08:24 <kaz> @@@: a few more words are needed
18:08:45 <kaz> markW: good to have target smaller
18:09:07 <kaz> igarashi: passing DRM informaiton or something
18:09:15 <kaz> ... it's more generic
18:09:22 <kaz> ... 1.1 provide a way to...
18:09:40 <kaz> clarke: others?
18:10:14 <kaz> mav: maybe good to provide concrete code as example?
18:10:25 <kaz> ... could do over emais?
18:10:30 <kaz> clarke: good suggestion
18:10:36 <kaz> mav: jan?
18:10:45 <kaz> jan: will do
18:11:15 <kaz> clarke: any objection on the updated "what needs to be standardized"?
18:11:20 <kaz> all: agree
18:11:32 <kaz> topic: adaptive streaming
18:11:52 <kaz> ISSUE-34?
18:11:52 <trackbot> ISSUE-34 -- Adaptive Bit Rate Delivery -- raised
18:11:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/34
18:12:05 <kaz> -> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions/Adaptive_Bit_Rate_Delivery ISSUE-34 description
18:12:17 <kaz> clarke: (explain the requirement)
18:12:45 <Kiyoko> Kiyoko has joined #webtv
18:13:03 <kaz> ... want to identify gaps
18:13:15 <kaz> ... what needs to be standardized?
18:13:46 <kaz> jan: my suggestion is adding one more bullet on "statistics"
18:14:02 <kaz> clarke: number of dropped packets, etc.?
18:14:13 <kaz> david: why doesn't this work today?
18:14:19 <kaz> ... you can tell
18:14:53 <kaz> ... meaning whole the list
18:15:05 <alexken> alexken has joined #webtv
18:15:08 <kaz> markW: very limitted practical things need to be added
18:16:22 <kaz> clarke: David's point is whether thre is there efficient support on formant or not
18:16:27 <kaz> ... MIME type, etc.
18:16:40 <kaz> bob: that's not enough?
18:16:50 <kaz> david: why it isn't enough?
18:17:23 <kaz> bob: how you might rephraze?
18:18:04 <kaz> mav: just take 2 off the lisgt
18:18:11 <kaz> clarke: can do that
18:18:30 <kaz> (clarke removed number 2 "The video element...")
18:18:41 <kaz> (there are remaining three items)
18:19:09 <kaz> mav: you can have number 1 works
18:19:15 <kaz> ... what's the question?
18:19:35 <kaz> ... assume different MIME types
18:19:51 <kaz> markW: as long as the notation allows MIME types
18:20:05 <kaz> ... UA should be able to make decision
18:20:28 <kaz> mav: would suggest we delete number 1
18:21:09 <kaz> (some more discussion)
18:21:30 <kaz> clarke: don't hear anybody definitely need this
18:21:56 <kaz> igarashi: btw, why did we remove number 2?
18:22:07 <kaz> (it was "The video element needs to support playback of adaptive bit rate formats. ")
18:22:24 <kaz> clarke: it is captured by the other items
18:23:10 <kaz> igarashi: independent from specific format
18:23:23 <kaz> ... not related with this discussion
18:24:19 <kaz> markW: we should state there is a model which people are interested
18:24:35 <kaz> ... low media data is sent by media element
18:24:50 <Jerry> Jerry has joined #webtv
18:25:16 <kaz> igarashi: during the workshop, we still had discussion on DASH profile for HTML5
18:25:26 <kaz> ... is that still in scope?
18:25:36 <kaz> clarke: maybe number 2 capture that
18:25:47 <kaz> ... clarify what format you are talking about
18:26:00 <kaz> (that is now "The video element interface must support specification of adaptive bit rate parameters, e.g. maximum bit rate to be used for playback. ")
18:26:14 <dcorvoysier> dcorvoysier has joined #webtv
18:26:30 <kaz> igarashi: my question is that in Berlin we had some discussion on RF version of DASH
18:26:43 <kaz> ... DASH profile for HTML5
18:27:25 <kaz> ... do we have one specific streaming format?  or should allow more than one formats?
18:27:39 <kaz> clareke: think we have that
18:27:45 <kaz> ... let me write down
18:28:14 <kaz> igarashi: maybe I was misunderstanding number 2
18:28:23 <kaz> giuseppe: the question we should answer is
18:28:55 <kaz> ... there is additional information on type
18:29:13 <kaz> clarke: my question is those might be implemented
18:29:20 <kaz> ... additional parameters?
18:29:39 <kaz> ... or just use MIME type and look at manifest file?
18:29:52 <kaz> ... igarashi?
18:30:22 <kaz> igarashi: don't think manifest file is a format
18:30:51 <kaz> ... we should explicitly specify file formats
18:30:59 <kaz> clarke: couple of questions
18:31:16 <kaz> ... do we want to support multiple formats?
18:31:34 <kaz> ... want to include MIME type? parameters separately?
18:31:41 <kaz> ... what do we want to support?
18:32:08 <kaz> igarashi: how to specify type for adaptive streaming?
18:32:28 <kaz> ... multiple MIME types could be included
18:32:45 <kaz> ... content-type can't be used for identification
18:33:07 <kaz> markW: you could specify whole bunch of MIME types
18:33:32 <kaz> ... the criteria should be
18:33:53 <kaz> ... because of the failure UA can't play some format
18:34:02 <kaz> david: to work with is UA
18:35:11 <kaz> ... DOM will be rewritten
18:35:32 <kaz> clarke: seeing the consensus number is not a requirement
18:35:41 <kaz> david: it is a requirement, but already supported
18:35:50 <kaz> clarek: (removes number 1 as well)
18:36:02 <kaz> (now we have just two items)
18:36:29 <kaz> david: why do you want to limit?
18:37:34 <kaz> davidmays: different publication of content
18:37:54 <kaz> markW: generate them on the fly
18:38:06 <kaz> ... you might want to provide some limitation
18:38:16 <kaz> ... internet connection is one of the causes
18:39:02 <kaz> jan: one comment
18:39:14 <kaz> ... one thing I was wondering was about minimum
18:39:28 <kaz> ... the user might want to have some specific video quality
18:39:43 <kaz> ... it would make sense to have minimum level bit rate as well
18:39:54 <kaz> clarke: should rephraze this
18:41:08 <kaz> david: choice of multiple languages for caption
18:41:24 <kaz> markW: always have different tracks
18:41:41 <kaz> ... that's a different question from this topic
18:42:20 <sunghan> sunghan has joined #webtv
18:42:41 <kaz> mav: is there any existing today?
18:43:04 <kaz> ... my understanding is HTML WG is shipping
18:43:20 <kaz> ... exisiting widely deployed platform
18:43:34 <kaz> ... flash documentation, etc.,  as well
18:43:53 <kaz> clarke: maybe ok to keep this (number 1)
18:44:16 <kaz> ... add example and reference
18:44:23 <kaz> s/1/2/
18:44:48 <kaz> markW: there are various adaptive bit rate algorythms
18:45:46 <Soonho> s/algorythms/algorithms/
18:45:56 <kaz> clarke: trade off about supporting multiple formats
18:46:08 <kaz> clarke: any other discussion?
18:46:31 <kaz> s/(number 2)//
18:47:18 <kaz> @@@: overriding algorithms
18:47:44 <kaz> jan: the third one missing is statistics
18:48:12 <kaz> ... do you have actual use cases?
18:48:56 <kaz> markW: has been a lot of discussion
18:49:08 <kaz> ... having all of usual media handling
18:49:55 <kaz> ... there is already requirements for adaptive streaming for JavaScript
18:50:33 <kaz> @@@: subscribers may want to tweet
18:50:54 <kaz> jan: the statics could be very critical based on the algorighms
18:51:06 <kaz> s/algorighms/algorithms/
18:51:25 <franck> s/statics/statistics/
18:51:32 <kaz> clarke: might want to extend the point two for statistics
18:52:22 <kaz> jan: could be kept as a separate bullet
18:56:12 <kaz> russell: bit rate parameter, etc.
18:57:10 <kaz> markW: video element does provide buffering capability
18:57:26 <kaz> clarke: any other comments?
18:57:36 <giuseppe> mozilla guys have done some work on statistics
18:57:36 <giuseppe> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580531
18:57:43 <giuseppe> are we suggesting we should extend it?
18:58:08 <kaz> clarke: will add statistics point as the third item here. any objections?
18:58:15 <kaz> all: agree
18:58:17 <giuseppe> http://people.mozilla.org/~cpearce/paint-stats-demo.html
18:58:52 <kaz> clarke: do we want to request for minimum rate?
18:59:28 <kaz> markW: HTML WG could agree with minum codec
19:00:03 <kaz> s/minum/minimum/
19:00:15 <kaz> igarashi: should avoid diversity of implementations
19:00:32 <kaz> ... was there any discussion on adaptive streaming during the workshop
19:00:39 <kaz> s/workshop/workshop?/
19:01:52 <kaz> clareke: moderate the session (Session 5 / Content Format and Codecs: DASH and Codec standards)
19:03:10 <kaz> -> http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webtvws-minutes.html#item02 workshop minutes
19:03:47 <kaz> david: regarding point 2, it's not uniq to adaptive streaming
19:04:00 <kaz> markW: error reporting is an important one
19:04:21 <kaz> clarke: other items around adaptive streaming?
19:04:25 <kaz> all: none
19:05:16 <kaz> topic: viewport (ISSUE-37)
19:05:19 <kaz> issue-37?
19:05:19 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 -- View-Port support for Video Window -- closed
19:05:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/37
19:05:34 <kaz> -> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions/ViewPort-Support ISSUE-37 description
19:08:59 <kaz> clarke: issue by Duncan
19:09:15 <kaz> ... (explain the description)
19:09:38 <kaz> ... what can be done today?
19:09:56 <kaz> s/@@@/Duncan/g
19:10:46 <kaz> duncan: on a CE device, resource might be limited
19:10:59 <will> will has joined #webtv
19:11:53 <kaz> ... smaller device could have a picture in picture
19:12:25 <kaz> ... resource problem and starting problem
19:12:29 <Russell_Berkoff> we are talking about the video element showing part of a full-video stream???
19:12:34 <kaz> s/starting/styling/
19:13:34 <kaz> markW: are you talking about a scenario with a lot of small pictures?
19:13:54 <kaz> ... you want to show subsets of a video
19:14:02 <kaz> duncan: yes
19:14:15 <kaz> david: video fragment URI could be used
19:14:17 <Zakim> Zakim has left #webtv
19:15:21 <kaz> jc: you should be very clear about the size and offset
19:15:50 <kaz> markW: box layout property for video
19:16:10 <kaz> davidC: you want to zoom video?
19:16:22 <kaz> ... think you can do it using canvas
19:16:40 <kaz> duncan: hardware acceleration problem with using canvas
19:17:05 <kaz> markW: you need to address them
19:18:07 <kaz> ... you've got to come with some rationale
19:19:07 <kaz> ... ultemately, those manipulation might happen, but requires for support of graphic cards
19:19:40 <kaz> ... canvas API doesn't imply access to streaming video
19:20:10 <kaz> clarke: maybe we need to refine this requirement
19:20:25 <kaz> ... wording and justification
19:20:29 <kaz> duncan: will do
19:20:44 <kaz> action: duncan to modify ISSUE-37
19:20:45 <trackbot> Created ACTION-80 - Modify ISSUE-37 [on Duncan Rowden - due 2011-09-29].
19:21:00 <kaz> bryan: show running examples
19:21:29 <kaz> clarke: from motivation standpoint, it's upto the changes that can be done
19:21:58 <kaz> markW: good way is show people this is what we can
19:22:14 <kaz> clarke: rationale on requesting changes
19:22:40 <kaz> topic: stereo video
19:22:44 <kaz> issue-49?
19:22:44 <trackbot> ISSUE-49 -- Stereo video support -- raised
19:22:44 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/49
19:23:08 <kaz> -> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions/Stereo_Video_support ISSUE-49 description
19:23:22 <kaz> russell: (explains)
19:24:09 <kaz> ... 2D, 3D format
19:24:30 <kaz> ... what needs to be standardized
19:24:47 <kaz> ... video elemnt for 3D
19:25:41 <kaz> ... full screen model
19:25:45 <kaz> s/model/mode/
19:26:27 <kaz> clarke: first question is anything preventing video element from showing 3D?
19:26:33 <kaz> russell: no
19:26:44 <kaz> ... this is switching
19:26:53 <kaz> clarke: discussion
19:27:16 <kaz> david: CSS issue?
19:27:34 <kaz> ... don't think any issue
19:27:41 <kaz> s/issue/issue for this group/
19:28:04 <kaz> ... what do you do with 3D
19:28:10 <kaz> s/3D/3D?/
19:28:33 <kaz> ... captioning for 3D?
19:29:15 <kaz> clarke: anything related to screen size?
19:29:25 <kaz> ... separate requirement
19:29:59 <kaz> russell: automatically switch to 3D
19:30:12 <kaz> ... could be a styling attribute, e.g., CSS
19:31:11 <kaz> ... ideally automatic selection
19:31:47 <kaz> ... assuming this is all encoded in a video stream
19:32:08 <kaz> markW: may be the case
19:33:33 <kaz> (some more discussion)
19:34:01 <kaz> clarke: there a few more to talk about
19:35:38 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
19:35:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/22-webtv-minutes.html kaz
20:16:22 <truth> truth has joined #webtv
20:29:37 <JanL> For further details on the OIPF implementation on the DRM API refer to this link, section 7.6 "Content Service Protection API" http://www.oipf.tv/live/oipf/docs/Release2/V2.1/OIPF-T1-R2-Specification-Volume-5-Declarative-Application-Environment-v2_1-2011-06-21.pdf
20:48:03 <Iraj> Iraj has joined #webtv
20:48:32 <sakamoto> sakamoto has joined #webtv
20:48:52 <Fuhrhop> scribenick: Fuhrhop
20:50:35 <Fuhrhop> Group photo will be taken soon.
20:51:09 <Fuhrhop> I.e. now.
20:57:22 <young> young has joined #webtv
20:57:42 <Fuhrhop> Photo taken, back to work...
20:57:55 <bryan> bryan has joined #webtv
20:58:14 <will> will has joined #webtv
20:58:16 <Fuhrhop> Continuation of previous session.
20:58:35 <dcorvoysier> dcorvoysier has joined #webtv
20:58:45 <kensaku> kensaku has joined #webtv
20:58:54 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Wrapping up 3D discussion before moving on.
20:59:10 <Fuhrhop> No new issues coming up.
20:59:26 <Fuhrhop> Next: Issue 18
20:59:44 <Fuhrhop> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/VideoTagSupportMpeg2-ts
21:00:05 <aizu> aizu has joined #webtv
21:00:31 <Fuhrhop> Jan: Have been in discussion with Bob and mailing list.
21:00:32 <okubo> okubo has joined #webtv
21:00:41 <Fuhrhop> Couple of slides to present.
21:01:08 <Fuhrhop> Bug 13358 Update
21:01:25 <Fuhrhop> Two addtional bugs to create will be mentioned later
21:02:20 <Fuhrhop> Would like additional information if any non-selected tracks have been modified.
21:02:52 <Fuhrhop> Clarifycation about which events are reported is needed
21:02:57 <Fuhrhop> New bugs:
21:03:37 <Fuhrhop> Issue 18 New Bug 1: Usage of constants are inconsistent for audio track 
21:03:59 <Fuhrhop> should use disabled (as for text track) instead of off.
21:04:33 <sunghan> sunghan has joined #webtv
21:04:34 <Fuhrhop> Issue 18 New Bug 2: Video track can't be disabled.
21:05:03 <Fuhrhop> Text tracks can be disabled, audio tracks can be muted, but video tracks can not be disabled.
21:05:29 <graham> graham has joined #webtv
21:05:35 <Fuhrhop> Only possible to hide video and keep audio playing, but that leaves open whether resources are released.
21:07:16 <kensaku_> kensaku_ has joined #webtv
21:07:24 <mav> mav has joined #webtv
21:07:26 <truth> truth has joined #webtv
21:07:49 <donghyun_kang> donghyun_kang has joined #webtv
21:10:16 <Soonho> Soonho has joined #webtv
21:11:21 <Harrison> Harrison has joined #webtv
21:12:14 <kaz> kaz has joined #webtv
21:12:53 <Harrison_> Harrison_ has joined #webtv
21:13:19 <dsinger> there is 'hidden', 'display:none' (CSS) and the use of an audio tag to disable any video aspects
21:13:32 <dsinger> we need to explore what the meaning and consequences are of the three approaches
21:15:22 <Soonho> Soonho has left #webtv
21:15:35 <igarashi> igarashi has joined #webtv
21:15:41 <Soonho> Soonho has joined #webtv
21:16:03 <Soonho> Soonho has left #webtv
21:16:15 <Soonho> Soonho has joined #webtv
21:16:27 <kensaku> kensaku has joined #webtv
21:16:52 <bryan> bryan has joined #webtv
21:18:56 <davidmays1> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions/Client_Ad_Insertion
21:25:08 <bryan> test
21:26:07 <sakamoto> sakamoto has joined #webtv
21:26:23 <jongyoul> jongyoul has joined #webtv
21:26:36 <bryan> bryan has left #webtv
21:26:51 <bryan> bryan has joined #webtv
21:28:32 <bryan> bryan has left #webtv
21:29:45 <bryan> bryan has joined #webtv
21:30:07 <Russell_Berkoff> Russell_Berkoff has joined #webtv
21:31:38 <bryan> bryan has left #webtv
21:31:59 <bryan_> bryan_ has joined #webtv
21:33:16 <dcorvoysier> dcorvoysier has joined #webtv
21:34:32 <bryan> bryan has joined #webtv
21:34:52 <kaz> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions/Media_Synchronous_Web_Content
21:36:35 <Fuhrhop> Fuhrhop has joined #webtv
21:38:01 <Fuhrhop> MarkV: Why should be Caption and Subtitles in different metadata schemes and everything else be thrown together.
21:38:48 <Fuhrhop> David: Usually you design web experince incorporated in the media, so you know what your metadata is.
21:39:19 <Soonho> s/experince/experience
21:39:27 <Fuhrhop> MarkV: But a company like Comcast might not know what an other company like HBO attaches to a stream.
21:39:58 <Fuhrhop> So you don't want to lose the information what each metadata track means.
21:40:34 <Fuhrhop> Eric: Standards says metadata especially for scripting access, the rest for the user agent.
21:40:53 <Fuhrhop> Hence special 'generic' role of metadata as opposed to other tracks.
21:41:18 <Fuhrhop> MarkW: Subtitles and captions are universal concepts, other things are more specific to broadcast TV.
21:41:40 <Fuhrhop> MarkV: None of these are specific to broadcast - true for on-demand video as well.
21:42:13 <Fuhrhop> Such as 'movie extras' (essentially like DVD bonus material).
21:42:55 <Fuhrhop> Eric: Touch of backstory - if we put this in, we need clarification, who needs a mapping?
21:43:48 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Next issue: 36 
21:43:51 <Fuhrhop> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions//Parental_Controls
21:44:01 <Fuhrhop> Parental Controls (ISSUE-36) 
21:45:35 <Fuhrhop> Jan: Is that for metadata or the video stream?
21:46:27 <Fuhrhop> Jan: We have two levels of parental control, application and lower.
21:46:52 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Description refers to an event about something that was already denied. 
21:47:23 <Fuhrhop> Jan: Some countries have regulation that content must be blocked on low level.
21:47:39 <Fuhrhop> We might need to clarify the use case.
21:48:00 <Fuhrhop> Systems might be forced to enforce parental control and all you get is an event.
21:48:24 <Fuhrhop> Other systems might allow applications/user agent to deal with it.
21:49:57 <Fuhrhop> Bryan: Even the fact that an error occured might give information "There's a child here."
21:50:45 <Fuhrhop> Guiseppe: But if the application just throws an error, it's hard to give user helpful information.
21:51:14 <Fuhrhop> MarkV: You might be blocked for non-payment, geograhical breasons or whatever. 
21:51:32 <Fuhrhop> Informing the user on the reasons is good.
21:52:31 <Fuhrhop> MarkW: The element blocking the playing should alert the user, not relying on a web application to perform the job.
21:53:12 <Fuhrhop> Guiseppe: Might work well on a desktop browser, but might not be a good way on an embedded browser.
21:53:31 <Fuhrhop> Might be no way to give information through the browser.
21:53:57 <Fuhrhop> MarkW: But some component must implement parental guidance settings - should also be responsible
21:54:07 <Fuhrhop> for display of parental guidance messages.
21:55:01 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Second item - inform web content of media content's rating.
21:55:01 <Soonho> s/geograhical breasons/geographical reasons/
21:55:17 <Fuhrhop> Jan: Might be same event, but one blocks, the other one informs.
21:55:33 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Any more discussion on second item?
21:55:36 <Fuhrhop> -non-
21:55:47 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Last topic - TV Services
21:56:07 <Fuhrhop> TV Services and media transport mapping use case (ISSUE-39) 
21:56:16 <Fuhrhop> http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF/MPTF_Discussions/TV_services_transport_mapping
21:56:38 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Mist will be handled on conference call, this is mainly an overview.
21:57:14 <Fuhrhop> Intend to do is to fill the boxes (in issue wiki) and find what already exists and what gaps remain.
21:57:25 <Fuhrhop> Not much to do about it now.
21:57:34 <Fuhrhop> But are any items missing?
21:58:01 <Fuhrhop> Yes - EPG information from SI (current, next program)
21:59:10 <Fuhrhop> David: Devise ways to include VTT and TTML in MP4 and DASH - volunteers needed.
21:59:32 <Fuhrhop> MarkV: Happy to help.
21:59:50 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Any other comments on issue 39?
22:00:01 <Fuhrhop> -none forthcoming-
22:00:58 <Fuhrhop> s/Mist/Most/
22:01:44 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Timed Text (Issue 33) nothing that needs to be added.
22:02:38 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Most of content delivery isses were covered in DASH discussions.
22:02:49 <Fuhrhop> Issue 42,43 and 51.
22:03:29 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Is there a motivation to adopt DASH as adaptive streaming format or do we want to be more agnostic.
22:03:40 <Fuhrhop> s/./?/
22:04:07 <Fuhrhop> John: Should be format agnostic, but it should work with DASH, due to its importance in the market.
22:04:28 <Fuhrhop> But there are other adaptive streaming processes, so keep interfaces that are common and leave the 
22:04:32 <Fuhrhop> rest to a lower layer.
22:04:58 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Are there preferences within the room on how the information should be conveyed?
22:05:03 <sunghan_> sunghan_ has joined #webtv
22:05:12 <Fuhrhop> Should we define MIME types for the different formats?
22:05:19 <dcorvoysier> dcorvoysier has joined #webtv
22:05:33 <Fuhrhop> John: I would assume the ideal outcome would be that the API is designed such that it is transparent
22:05:44 <Fuhrhop> what type of adaptive streaming is used.
22:07:03 <Fuhrhop> Some information on when to change bandwidth might not become available to the application.
22:07:25 <Fuhrhop> If the underlying technologies are so different that they require different handling in the API (which does not
22:07:41 <Fuhrhop> seem likely at the moment), then the issue might be different.
22:08:28 <Fuhrhop> David: Might be an issue for a vertical specification for a specific industry segment, not that much for W3C.
22:09:06 <Fuhrhop> Jan: W3c provides the mechanism, other bodies (like OIPF) might use that then for a vertical integration.
22:09:41 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Covered the planned issues.
22:10:00 <Fuhrhop> 20 minutes left - do we need to cover use cases we haven't considered yet?
22:10:10 <Fuhrhop> Jan: How about SVG discussion?
22:11:25 <Fuhrhop> Support for video tag in SVG (Issue 18, item 6)
22:11:58 <Fuhrhop> Video tag has got a lot of work for HTML, not that much for SVG, for consistency there should be more work on that.
22:12:21 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Are you suggestiong they should be tracked together or that SVG refernces HTML video tag.
22:12:31 <truth> truth has joined #webtv
22:12:43 <Fuhrhop> Jan: No preference, but they should provide the same capabilities.
22:13:04 <Fuhrhop> Guiseppe: Might be an issue for TPAC: SVG vs HTML video 
22:13:09 <yoshiaki> yoshiaki has joined #webtv
22:13:16 <Fuhrhop> 'vs' as in comparision, not as conflict.
22:13:35 <Fuhrhop> Kaz: We could talk about that at TPC session.
22:13:45 <Juhani> Juhani has joined #webtv
22:13:50 <Fuhrhop> David: Alternative would be profile of SVG without video.
22:14:11 <Fuhrhop> Just scaling verctors, no images, videos, fonts...
22:14:20 <Fuhrhop> s/verctors/vectors/
22:14:56 <Fuhrhop> David C: How to deal with video coming from a tuner.
22:15:07 <Soonho> s/TPC/TPAC/
22:15:22 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: There are 'undefined' streams in the spec that can be live broadcast from a tuner.
22:15:43 <Fuhrhop> Clark: Is that sufficient ot are you talking about the control layer.
22:16:01 <Fuhrhop> David C: Just access to stream would be sufficient at first.
22:16:19 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: Any additional comments on that?
22:16:22 <Fuhrhop> -none-
22:16:28 <Fuhrhop> Clark: Other items?
22:16:31 <Fuhrhop> -none-
22:16:49 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: So we end the meeting 15 minutes early.
22:17:32 <Fuhrhop> Clarke: So we restart next session 15 minutes early 
22:17:50 <Fuhrhop> Reconvene at 15:45.
22:20:36 <grahamc> grahamc has joined #webtv
22:52:54 <bryan> scribenick: bryan
22:53:15 <bryan> Topic: wrap-up
22:53:32 <bryan> yosuke: new task forces
22:54:08 <bryan> ... Pablo will take care of Social TV
22:54:23 <bryan> Yosuke will take care of Disaster Prevention...
22:54:36 <okubo> okubo has joined #webtv
22:54:48 <bryan> ... David will take care of Captioning
22:55:07 <bryan> ... Adaptive Streaming is already being addressed by MPTF
22:55:29 <bryan> ... Metadata is also being addressed by MPTF
22:56:01 <sunghan> sunghan has joined #webtv
22:56:07 <bryan> ... MPTF result on Parental Control may include new TF
22:56:25 <bryan> ... re Testing, the new IG can provide a place for the discussions
22:57:48 <bryan> mv: re certification, understand test and test frameworks is scope of W3C, certification is outside W3C
22:58:10 <bryan> ... there is a middle, certification organizations may want to use the tests
22:58:50 <bryan> ... somebody who has expertise may use the tests
22:59:13 <duncanr> duncanr has joined #webtv
22:59:36 <bryan> bryan: this is in the charter of the IG
22:59:58 <bryan> guiseppe: we need some input to that group
23:00:10 <MattH> MattH has joined #webtv
23:00:22 <bryan> mv: can initiate a connection from cert organizations
23:00:27 <Iraj> Iraj has joined #webtv
23:00:57 <bryan> giuseppe: the IG is the right place to do it, will be finalized soon
23:01:37 <graham> Maybe this discussion should include the profile TF discussion as well..
23:01:37 <bryan> yosuke: re existing standards for IPTV, no TF is needed
23:02:01 <bryan> ... re API access to low-level functions, more discussion is needed on the list
23:02:21 <bryan> ... re Best Practices, this will also be further discussed on the list
23:02:56 <bryan> ... this list will be included in the IG report
23:03:19 <bryan> giuseppe: HNTF report
23:03:34 <bryan> ... final deadline for the Req document is TPAC
23:04:12 <bryan> ... next step is to bring a complete proposal to DAP for those interested, until a new group is determined to be needed
23:05:25 <bryan> ... if we turn out with two groups doing the same thing, this needs to be discussed at TPAC
23:05:50 <bryan> ... what we do in the HNTF, once the doc is published, we can close the TF and reactivate later as needed
23:06:36 <bryan> russell: unclear how decision was made to start with DAP - two members already recommended a new group
23:07:16 <bryan> giuseppe: we need to first have that discussion, to see if it is diverging from what the DAP is doing, and it is already in the DAP charter, so we need to first have the discussion at least
23:07:51 <bryan> ... work needs to for now start in DAP, and become DAP members if wanting to participate in that work
23:08:55 <bryan> giuseppe: there are organizational approaches to ensure people not interested in current DAP work are not distracted by it
23:09:03 <bryan> ... if no objection, that is the plan
23:09:43 <bryan> clarke: wrapup - MPTF is following in the footsteps of HNTF and will present to TPAC
23:10:27 <bryan> ... progress toward reqs will be nailed down in the next 6 weeks and the proposals will then be presented to the WGs
23:10:51 <bryan> ... we need to get on the agenda for groups, e.g. HTML and other groups - any questions?
23:11:18 <graham> no discussion on profiling?
23:11:44 <bryan> @@@: how work items get started in the other WGs, do they need time for that, what is the process?
23:12:12 <Fuhrhop> s/@@@/Iraj/
23:12:20 <bryan> kaz: procedure is to go to the groups and consider how the work fits into their charters, and update as needed
23:13:22 <bryan> markw: if there is something to HTML group, members need to go there to argue for the items
23:13:46 <bryan> Iraj: what is the process for new features?
23:14:16 <bryan> kaz: HTML WG is working on how to start the next work, W3C is considering this also
23:15:16 <bryan> clarke: we have a lot of momentum and interested parties, we need to go to the groups and work on the standards, but may need to form TFs in the group to address the items, or something else - but we need to maintain the momentum
23:15:50 <bryan> ... we don't have to wait for things to be standarized to be implemented. we can work to consensus and with the browser vendors to get them implemented
23:16:20 <bryan> MarkW: it's actually better to implement then standardize - companies should go ahead and experiment
23:16:57 <bryan> clarke: Cable Labs is proceeding to develop implementations and submitting them
23:17:26 <bryan> yosuke: Topic: other expected joint meetings during TPAC
23:18:42 <bryan> kaz: results of the questionnaire on joint meetings
23:19:57 <bryan> ... Device APIs, HTML WG, SVG, WAI Protocols & Formats, Multimodal were the highest number of responses, in high to low order
23:20:52 <bryan> JanL: what are we determining with the quesitonnaire?
23:21:05 <bryan> giuseppe: to know what joint meetings to have
23:21:14 <bryan> ... we need to arrange this ahead of time
23:21:39 <bryan> JanL: DAP and HTML WG makes sense
23:22:45 <bryan> kaz: TPAC registration is open, members need to register
23:22:52 <kensaku> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2011/
23:23:21 <bryan> Igarashi: add one to MMI recommendation for joint meeting
23:24:46 <bryan> kaz: TP day is on Wed, it will be an unconference day, and can be discussed now based upon member proposals
23:25:00 <bryan> ... members are welcome to make proposals
23:25:30 <bryan> giuseppe: SVG and HTML video could be another topic to add
23:26:15 <bryan> giuseppe: Oct 1 deadline for suggestions
23:26:29 <bryan> clarke: it would help to know who is responsible for arranging meetings
23:26:39 <bryan> giuseppe: working to setup the meeting with DAP
23:26:52 <bryan> clarke: will work to setup the HTML WG meeting
23:27:09 <bryan> kaz: I will contact all of the proposed groups
23:27:56 <bryan> yosuke: closing remarks
23:28:24 <bryan> ... discussed a wide variety of topics in two task forces, with lively discussions (listed topics)
23:28:45 <bryan> ... consensus has been reached on important issues, and what we should do for TPAC
23:28:52 <bryan> ... continue discussion on list
23:29:08 <bryan> ... thanks to all who attended and supported, and to Comcast for hosting
23:29:19 <bryan> (much applause)
23:30:08 <duncanr> duncanr has left #webtv
23:43:24 <davidmays> davidmays has joined #webtv
23:53:35 <mav> mav has joined #webtv