14:56:38 RRSAgent has joined #html-media
14:56:38 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/07/17-html-media-irc
14:56:40 RRSAgent, make logs 185
14:56:42 Zakim, this will be 63342
14:56:42 ok, trackbot; I see HTML_WG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
14:56:43 Meeting: HTML Media Task Force Teleconference
14:56:43 Date: 17 July 2012
14:57:21 rrsagent, make logs public
14:58:17 paulc has joined #html-media
14:58:32 Clarke has joined #html-media
14:58:36 zakim, who's on the phone?
14:58:36 HTML_WG()11:00AM has not yet started, glenn
14:58:37 On IRC I see Clarke, paulc, RRSAgent, Zakim, adrianba, NiXu, yang, MikeSmith, glenn, trackbot, [tm]
14:59:15 zakim, who's on the phone?
14:59:15 HTML_WG()11:00AM has not yet started, yang
14:59:16 On IRC I see Clarke, paulc, RRSAgent, Zakim, adrianba, NiXu, yang, MikeSmith, glenn, trackbot, [tm]
14:59:27 duncanr has joined #html-media
14:59:37 zakim, who is making the noise?
14:59:37 I don't understand your question, paulc.
14:59:48 zakim, who's noisy?
14:59:48 sorry, glenn, I don't know what conference this is
14:59:54 zakim, this is HTML_WG
14:59:54 ok, adrianba; that matches HTML_WG()11:00AM
15:00:06 zakim, who is on the phone?
15:00:06 On the phone I see ??P4, nixu, ??P5 (muted), [Microsoft], ??P10
15:00:15 zakim, ??p5 is glenn
15:00:15 +glenn; got it
15:00:18 zakim, [Microsoft] has paulc, adrianba
15:00:18 +paulc, adrianba; got it
15:00:28 +duncanr
15:00:30 zakim, ??P4 is me
15:00:30 +yang; got it
15:01:01 ScribeNick: adrianba
15:01:06 Scribe: Adrian Bateman
15:01:08 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0057.html
15:01:10 Chair: Paul Cotton
15:01:14 I have muted me... any noise now?
15:01:17 zakim, list the attendees
15:01:17 I don't understand 'list the attendees', paulc
15:01:22 ddorwin has joined #html-media
15:01:24 zakim, list
15:01:24 I see WAI_(WCAG2ICT)10:00AM, HTML_WG()11:00AM, SW_RIF()11:00AM, XML_ET-TF()11:00AM active
15:01:26 markw has joined #html-media
15:01:27 also scheduled at this time are SW_HCLS()11:00AM, RWC_WebEven()11:00AM, WAI_PFWG(HTML_TF)11:00AM, VB_VBWG()10:00AM, T&S_XMLSEC()10:00AM, SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM,
15:01:27 ... WAI_UAWG(CHAIRS)10:30AM, HTML_WG(HTMLT)11:00AM
15:01:27 zakim, list attendees
15:01:29 As of this point the attendees have been nixu, glenn, paulc, adrianba, duncanr, yang
15:01:35 zakim, who is on the phone?
15:01:35 On the phone I see yang, nixu, glenn (muted), [Microsoft], ??P10, duncanr
15:01:37 [Microsoft] has paulc, adrianba
15:01:47 zakim, ??P10 is me
15:01:47 +Clarke; got it
15:01:57 +markw
15:02:21 acolwell has joined #html-media
15:02:33 +[GVoice]
15:02:40 zakim, [GVoice] is me
15:02:40 +ddorwin; got it
15:03:16 +acolwell
15:03:48 zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:49 On the phone I see yang, nixu, glenn (muted), [Microsoft], Clarke, duncanr, markw, ddorwin, acolwell
15:03:49 [Microsoft] has paulc, adrianba
15:04:12 TOPIC: Roll call, introductions, and selection of scribe
15:04:24 paulc: done
15:04:35 TOPIC: Previous meeting minutes
15:04:42 + +1.408.544.aaaa
15:04:48 http://www.w3.org/2012/06/19-html-media-minutes.html
15:05:29 paulc: there were a couple of items that we created semi-actions from the last minutes
15:05:42 TOPIC: Review action items
15:05:45 https://www.w3.org/html/wg/media/track/
15:05:52 paulc: none for MSE
15:06:00 TOPIC: Baseline documents
15:06:10 Editor's Draft: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/media-source/media-source.html
15:06:28 Media Source Extensions bugs: http://tinyurl.com/6pdnzej
15:06:44 TOPIC: Spec updated to object-oriented API
15:06:44 pladd has joined #html-media
15:06:54 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0005.html
15:07:29 BobLund has joined #html-media
15:07:39 acolwell: basically, i made all the changes we discussed before and rewritten most of the text
15:07:51 ... mainly it was moving methods around and putting them in objects as discussed
15:08:05 ... i did not include the append URL part - i felt we were still discussing this
15:08:18 ... i also tried to address a couple of other bugs
15:08:26 ... for example about audio tracks and video tracks
15:08:34 ... and added appropriate language about text tracks
15:08:40 +??P14
15:08:44 ... don't think this is completely done but better
15:08:58 ... added extra property called activeSourceBuffers
15:09:20 ... the buffers associated with selected tracks (currently selected video and all selected audio tracks)
15:09:31 ... but it was hard to tell which buffers were involved
15:09:38 Zakim, +1.408.544.3745 is me
15:09:38 sorry, pladd, I do not recognize a party named '+1.408.544.3745'
15:09:52 ... this is the set of buffers that you need to continue appending to to allow playback to continue
15:10:00 q+
15:10:02 paulc: anyone with questions?
15:10:08 zakim, 3745 is pladd
15:10:08 sorry, glenn, I do not recognize a party named '3745'
15:10:19 zakim, 1.408.544.3745 is pladd
15:10:19 sorry, glenn, I do not recognize a party named '1.408.544.3745'
15:10:24 ack yang
15:10:48 zakim, i give up
15:10:48 I don't understand 'i give up', glenn
15:11:00 yang: where was the spec modified for text tracks?
15:11:05 >- Added TextTrack language in various places since it was overlooked in the
15:11:29 added appropriate language about text tracks
15:11:31 yang: html5 spec already has language information
15:12:02 acolwell: i added text to the document that is related to text tracks
15:12:16 ... it's not that I added a language attribute
15:12:29 ... i added text to describe how text tracks are handled because it was missing before
15:12:37 yang: got it, thank you
15:12:40 q?
15:12:48 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/media-source/media-source.html#track-buffer
15:12:52 zakim, who is on the phone?
15:12:52 On the phone I see yang, nixu, glenn (muted), [Microsoft], Clarke, duncanr, markw, ddorwin, acolwell, +1.408.544.aaaa, ??P14
15:12:54 [Microsoft] has paulc, adrianba
15:13:14 zakim, aaaa is pladd
15:13:14 +pladd; got it
15:13:28 acolwell: here is an example where i mention text tracks
15:13:36 Look at are there some hidden in your suitcase?
15:13:51 >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0020.html
15:13:55 s/Look at are there some hidden in your suitcase?//
15:14:30 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/media-source/media-source.html#sourcebufferlist
15:14:42 acolwell: this is the existing sourcebufferlist IDL
15:14:57 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/media-source/media-source.html#mediasource
15:15:08 ... this is the existing mediasource IDL
15:15:31 ... the idea is to move the remove() method from sourcebufferlist to mediasource as removeSourceBuffer()
15:15:37 ... there are couple of reasons for this
15:15:56 ... one argument is consistency - always add and remove from the same object - the mediasource
15:16:09 ... it would be nice for this to be symmetrical
15:16:35 ... now there there is a sourcebuffers and activesourcebuffers - if i remove a buffer from one of these then it should affect the other
15:16:58 ... if i remove a buffer that is part of activesourcebuffers, currently i could say activesourcebuffers.remove()
15:17:14 and this would also remove from sourcebuffers (because activesourcebuffers is a subset of the other)
15:17:19 q+
15:17:24 ... and it would be surprising to people if this affected both
15:17:44 ... from an implementation perspective it is tricky to coordinate the two lists so events fire at appropriate times
15:17:47 ack yang
15:18:15 yang: there is no activesourcebuffers attribute?
15:18:24 acolwell: yes, it's the second from the top
15:18:54 yang: the remaining buffers will be inactive?
15:19:31 acolwell: currently there is sourcebuffers with all buffers and activesourcebuffers which is just the ones backing the active tracks (the current video track, selected audio tracks, and appropriate text tracks)
15:19:40 yang: how do you make a source buffer active?
15:20:03 acolwell: they become active based on the mechanism for selecting and enabling tracks in the HTMLMediaElement
15:20:32 ... videotracks has a selected attributed and each track in audiotracks has an enabled property
15:20:49 ...whenever the underlying track becomes active the associated buffer will move into the active list
15:21:10 yang: remove is available to the activesourcebuffers - is it available to sourcebuffers also?
15:21:27 remove is availabe to sourcebuffer list?
15:21:39 acolwell: my proposal is to make remove only part of mediasource because it is really about removing the buffer from the source completely and not from a particular list
15:22:12 ...moving this into the mediasource object we can remove from both lists with the single call if necessary
15:22:39 paulc: it is one thing to have a side-effect to have the buffer added to the active list but it would be strange to have it work in reverse
15:23:12 acolwell: if you remove a sourcebuffer from the activesourcebuffers it will affect the currently selected video track - there is some text that talks about what should happen in this situation
15:23:37 ... my point is that instead of removing from one list you remove from the source then it makes more sense that it is removed from both lists
15:23:39 q?
15:23:41 This discussion is about https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17082
15:23:42 q+
15:24:24 paulc: the current draft includes everything except the discussion in msg 20
15:24:57 acolwell: are people comfortable with just making this change or should we share text on the list?
15:26:05 yang: if we move remove from sourcebufferlist to mediasource then there will be an extra method on mediasource
15:26:21 remove method should be in parent node of sourcebufferlist
15:26:39 acolwell: i don't understand the objection - having remove on sourcebufferlist is not simpler because the two lists need to be synchronised
15:27:00 ...putting it in sourcebufferlist implies the two lists are independent and they are not
15:27:17 they are not indepent?
15:27:46 no. activeSourceBuffers is a subset of sourceBuffers
15:28:23 ok
15:28:25 got it
15:28:42 no objection now.
15:28:52 acolwell: all of the objects in activesourcebuffers are in sourcebuffers
15:29:06 paulc: is the right way to proceed to propose text in an email?
15:29:29 adrianba: i propose we just update the document
15:29:46 agreed
15:29:59 paulc: anyone object to updating the document?
15:30:09 ... no objections
15:30:25 yang: there will be a bug or email?
15:30:36 paulc: there already is an email - msg 20
15:30:54 yang, you can review the change after it is in the document
15:31:22 but i can not find which part change,in fact some part i have not reviewed
15:31:34 paulc: aaron, could you open a bug or send mail and make link to the check-in
15:32:32 acolwell: i should be able to make the change for remove() today and then let the group know by email where the change is
15:32:35 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17082
15:33:03 paulc: do these changes resolve this bug?
15:33:06 acolwell: yes
15:33:28 paulc: please mark the bug as fixed with links to email archive
15:33:33 acolwell: okay
15:33:51 TOPIC: Candidate Media Source Extension bugs for discussion
15:33:58 http://tinyurl.com/6pdnzej
15:34:19 paulc: could we look at bug 16997
15:34:27 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16997
15:34:36 paulc: Redesign mediaSourceURL mechanism to allow declarative syntax
15:34:50 ... does the object orientation change affect this?
15:35:07 acolwell: now that we're using createObjectURL there is no way to have a declarative method so this is out of scope
15:35:33 paulc: when the editor's mark 17082 as fixed, mark 16997 to make this out of scope
15:35:36 acolwell: okay
15:35:50 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16998
15:35:58 paulc: we discussed this at a previous meeting
15:36:10 ... earlier aaron you alluded that you didn't make this change
15:36:23 ... but i think we gave you an action on june 19 to make this change
15:36:41 acolwell: i can start making these changes - i think i should update the proposal to match the O-O changes
15:36:51 ... and propose new IDL so people can see what i'm talking about
15:36:52 Previous Jun 19 discussion: http://www.w3.org/2012/06/19-html-media-minutes.html#item06
15:37:03 ... and then there is a long email discussion about it
15:37:16 paulc: at the end of the discussion we said add new method and mark old one as at risk
15:37:24 q+
15:37:31 ... you haven't done this yet because you were focusing on the main O-O bug?
15:37:35 acolwell: correct
15:37:51 paulc: has there been continuing discussion invalidating the june 19 discussion?
15:38:07 acolwell: i think i want to summarise what we agreed on to see if people still agree
15:38:14 q?
15:39:49 yang: bug 16998 - the proposed change for source URL is start/length but originally it was start/end
15:40:21 ... if i use length then i might forget where to start next time but if i use end then it will be easier
15:40:34 ... do you still think start/length will be simpler?
15:41:13 acolwell: i think it will be less error prone because start/end follows HTTP range and for one byte the start and end are the same
15:41:28 ... but for length you can add length to the start to find the next start
15:41:33 yang: you think this is simpler?
15:41:47 acolwell: yes, start/length is more intuitive
15:41:51 See https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16998#c6
15:42:03 q?
15:42:06 ack next
15:42:09 ack yang
15:42:09 ack next
15:42:12 ack markw
15:42:32 markw: we need to figure out how to provide the application with progress of bytes arriving like XHR
15:42:39 ... i need to know this for each appendURL call
15:42:46 ... we don't quite have the structure there yet
15:43:07 ... we could do this with progress events on the sourcebuffer or we could create something like XHR or something else
15:43:29 paulc: you're okay with providing a summary and proposal on 16998?
15:43:33 acolwell: yes
15:43:43 ... i agree with mark to about progress events
15:44:01 ... for example, should we take a step back and figure out integration with XHR?
15:44:20 paulc: please provide a summary email about where we have agreement and where there are other hard questions remaining
15:44:39 ... if you can enumerate these as questions then we can get people on the list to offer answers or review your proposals
15:44:57 paulc: next item from the last meeting https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17004
15:45:09 paulc: last meeting discussion was inconclusive
15:45:24 ... discussion ended with "continue discussion on email"
15:45:40 ... have we made enough progress on this?
15:45:54 ... this appears to have split into a thread about ad insertion
15:46:03 Ad insertion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0033.html
15:46:26 ... and another thread where aaron provided a summary of where we are
15:46:36 Summary on 17004 thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0035.html
15:47:04 paulc: i'm wondering how we process this bug? what do we do about the split - is this more than one bug?
15:47:19 ... there has been some further discussion
15:47:29 ... it looks like this needs to continue on email?
15:47:50 acolwell: yes, i think we still need some discussion on timestamp offset - i thought of some new things to talk about over the weekend
15:47:52 Thread discussion ends at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2012Jul/0055.html
15:48:04 ... perhaps we can come back to this at the next meeting and have enough progress to update the spec
15:48:35 acolwell: on ad insertion, i think that is a separate feature request
15:48:49 ... i think it would be interesting to have this discussion but it isn't directly tied to the MSE work
15:49:04 ... and if the media list is the appropriate place to discuss this
15:49:24 paulc: you're saying this isn't a bug against the 2 specs we have?
15:49:29 + +1.760.533.aabb
15:49:33 -pladd
15:49:40 acolwell: it is about a time accurate pause and events
15:49:50 ... it seems like more of a feature for the media element
15:49:56 ... rather than MSE or EME
15:49:58 q+
15:50:13 q+
15:50:28 q- later
15:50:45