W3C

- DRAFT -

Audio Working Group Teleconference

12 Dec 2011

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
chrislo, kinetik, olivier, Michelle_Park, Doug_Schepers
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
chrislo

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 12 December 2011

<olivier> Last minutes -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2011OctDec/0132.html

<olivier> scribeNick: chrislo

Review of action items and resolutions from last week

Al sends his regrets.

Action 1 from previous meeting is done.

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 1

shepazu: Action 2 is in progress

olivier: has integrated WebRTC use cases into our doc. (Action 3)

<olivier> http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/wiki/Use-Cases#Requirements_from_the_Real-Time_Communications_Working_Group

olivier: the WebRTC have more requirements than use cases, so we'll need to find common terminology.

<olivier> trackbot, close action-5

<trackbot> ACTION-5 Integrate WebRTC use cases into our doc closed

but this looks good enough for the time being. So closing.

chris: is a bit concerned about changing the name since the API has wide coverage so far. Doesn't want to cause confusion by changing the name at this point.

olivier: the reason this was proposed was to keep the next steps as neutral as possible at this stage. Hence wanting to switch away from the generic name.
... remembers ROC saying he could live with keeping the names as currently.

chris: suggests that the umbrella name is "Audio processing API" and keep the names as current.

olivier: looking for consensus.

Resolution: The three documents will be Audio Processing API for the umbrella, and Web Audio API / Media Streaming API for the two proposals respectively.

f2f logistics

chris: can make enquires about whether Google could host the meeting.
... he can ask his manager.

olivier: do you think f2f could be held in Southern California / Mountain View.

chris: if we're choosing NAMM event it would be better if it was close to the event itself.
... I'll have to look into it a bit more.
... asks if Tom Wight had suggestions for a venue.

shepazu: looks it up, they don't have the space for 1-2 days.
... we should ask if the NAMM members have space for 10 people for 1-2 days

chris: could look into whether Google could finance that.

shepazu: will take it off list, keep olivier and chris in the loop.

olivier: for chrislo and I approval to attend is granted already, we're ok if logistics can be secured.
... what is the deadline for people to confirm, round the table?

chris: pretty easy for me. Would be good to attend NAMM as well.

shepazu: that's the link for anyone interested in attending.
... I got an invitation a couple of days ago. The deadline is today for signing up for invites.

olivier: the invitation, as I understand it, does not have strings attached.

shepazu: agrees.

Splitting work on use cases and requirements

olivier: could we already get a rough idea of who is planning to work on which areas of the use case and requirements docs.

<olivier> http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/wiki/Use-Cases

olivier: that's the use cases document
... we have 8 classes at the moment in this document.

<shepazu> http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/#requirements

olivier: I think we should try, for each class, to make sure the requirements are in line with the template shepazu just posted.

chris and chrislo mention that the XG group didn't spend too long on the pre-exisiting use case documents.

olivier: we need to spend a bit of time on this for the WG because it will help us to objectively rationalize/refine the two proposals.

shepazu: agrees.
... we need both use cases and requirements. They're good for communicating with the community and other groups.
... make sure there's no surprises and get early involvment from other groups.
... and we can advertise what we're working on, to get other people excited.
... it also helps if we want to move to candidate recommendation status. It helps to show that the work satisfies widely held needs.
... it's good to have a checklist for our own book keeping purposes.

olivier: asks shepazu to take us through this document.

<olivier> http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/#requirements

shepazu: rationale are known issues
... this is a pretty rigorous format.
... if we split use cases away from the requirements we can link between them.
... it will be useful when we have people actively reviewing the document.
... need identifier/name, motivation, rationale and a link to the use cases.

<olivier> ACTION: doug to show example of how to derive requirement from our use cases on the mailing-list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-6 - Show example of how to derive requirement from our use cases on the mailing-list [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-12-19].

shepazu: also the two specs have requirements already, so it's fine to "back port" them to this document.
... doing this will help us tease out the differences between the two documents.

chris: will be able to take a look at back porting the requirements.

shepazu: doesn't want to cut into chris's time as editor and implementor

olivier: concurs

<olivier> ACTION: Chris_Rogers to start back porting requirements from his proposed spec into use cases/reqs doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Chris_Rogers

shepazu: suggests we start on the wiki, he can convert later to another format.

<olivier> ACTION: Chris Rogers to start back porting requirements from his proposed spec into use cases/reqs doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Chris

<trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. clowis, crogers)

shepazu: will create a page.

<olivier> ACTION: CRogers to start back porting requirements from his proposed spec into use cases/reqs doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-7 - Start back porting requirements from his proposed spec into use cases/reqs doc [on Chris Rogers - due 2011-12-19].

publication of fpwd

fpwd = first public working draft

olivier: asks shepazu to explain the importance of this

shepazu: people are often asking what is happening with the audio working group, they are not sure of our progress
... so publishing frequently is important.
... w3c has a policy that we need to publish every 3 months (heartbeat requirement)
... many groups are quite lax about this, but it would be good for us in particular to show that we are actively moving forward.

chris: asks what the process is when publication happens - are they snapshots of a more rapidly changing document?
... should I commit to a repo on a day-to-day basis

shepazu: we decided to publish three documents as separate documents that are updated on their own time.
... the editors draft should always be the most up to date version of the document.
... you (chris) should always publish to mercurial repo, when we decide to publish shepazu or Thierry will take a snapshot and publish to TR-space

TR = technical report.

chris: I need to get changes back to the trunk repo when changes are made to publication.

shepazu: changes made in the publication fork should be merged back in. shepazu will work with chris to do this.

chris: I have some changes to make so should I put them directly in the mercurial repo?

shepazu: yes.
... and let me know, so I can keep the publication up to date.
... gives a brief update on recruiting members for the group

Intro to Tracker

shepazu: hardware people as well as implementors are welcome.

<olivier> http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/track/

^^ this is the tracking tool for our working group

olivier: it will help us track action items, issues in the spec etc.
... go and have a look, try it out. We'll be using this a lot.

shepazu: I'll be setting a test!

Any other business

olivier: Any other business?
... volunteer scribe for next week?

Matthew volunteers to scribe next time.

shepazu: would like us to focus on technical stuff going forward as much as possible.

olivier: agrees, it will happen now we're up and running.
... adjorns, with thanks.

<shepazu> trackbot, end telcon

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Chris Rogers to start back porting requirements from his proposed spec into use cases/reqs doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris_Rogers to start back porting requirements from his proposed spec into use cases/reqs doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: CRogers to start back porting requirements from his proposed spec into use cases/reqs doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: doug to show example of how to derive requirement from our use cases on the mailing-list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html#action01]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2011/12/12 21:58:56 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Roq/ROC/
Succeeded: s/the/this/
Found ScribeNick: chrislo
Inferring Scribes: chrislo
Default Present: chrislo, kinetik, olivier, Michelle_Park, Doug_Schepers
Present: chrislo kinetik olivier Michelle_Park Doug_Schepers

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 12 Dec 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/12/12-audio-minutes.html
People with action items: chris chris_rogers crogers doug rogers

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


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]