08 Apr 2015

See also: IRC log


Kaz, digitaldale, Bill_Rose, glennd, Paul_Higgs, Leslie_Daigle, jianz, giuseppe, So_Vang, Nilo, jhelman, Mark


<glennd> Agenda:

<glennd> 1. Review & approval of March 11th call minutes (http://www.w3.org/2015/03/11-webtv-minutes.html)

<glennd> 2. Agenda Bash

<glennd> 3. Review of new discovery use cases: https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF/UseCases/User_Discovery

Review & approval of March 11th call minutes

glenn: this is the only call in a month as we skipped last call
... does anyone object to approve last meeting minutes? no objection, so approved

Review of new discovery use cases

glenn: new use cases around user discovery content
... let's go over the usecases, I would like people while looking at the use cases to think if there are gaps in existing standard work
... that prevents us from covering these use cases
... let's bill present the new UCs

<kaz> Use Case Wiki


bill: UC1

the basic idea is to include some client information in order to improve the search results

so a user would usually include search criteria like title, actors etc while the client could automatically append information on codecs, license etc

this would avoid search results that cannot ultimately be played for whatever reason

bill: there could be a difference between the license that the user have and one that the client have. I'm not sure

glenn: I'm not sure there is a standard to represent either of them
... I'm not aware of any device profile

paul: maybe something in DLNA, loosely

bill: yes there should be something in DLNA
... but that is for the home network, not sure if that information leaves the HN

(bill and paul discuss DLNA profiles)

so: there is also some discussion in ATSC about this, maybe there is an opportunity for some coordination

yyy: is there something in bluetooth?

glenn: not sure, but also a good place to look
... so it seems we have identified a potential gap, i.e. there isn't a standard to define what a device support
... and also there isn't a standard way to respond to a request that would include a device profile
... also there is no standard to send this device profile to a server

leslie: is it time also to discuss privacy?

bill: yes, I added in the UC the possibility that the user could configure the device not to send all the device information
... to preserve privacy

glenn: there are probably different levels of information and hence privacy
... serivces I'm subscribed to VS device capabilities for examples
... there could also be restrictions based on the networks I'm on, e.g. home network VS out of home

bill: so at least two level of privacy, user client and network provider
... there is also a difference on where different info get configured /selected, e.g. an app UI VS device UI

glenn: from a device standpoint, I may allow an app to search on different networks and inside the device aggregate the results
... when we come back to discuss about network layer, would be good to discuss a UC around caching in case of multiple networks e.g. when a device have 3 networks but local cache only have access to two

bill: another option, more privacy savy, is to get all the metadata and make the decision on what can be played locally

glenn: let's move to UC2

bill: UC2 is about using a second screen (mobile) to search for content I want to watch on my first screen (TV)
... so is related to the previous one but here the device sending out information is not the same client playing the content
... to do this we probably need to get the TV profile in a similar way we needed before
... actually looking at UC2 again is not what I just described
... is more about using the tablet/phone to control UI the TV
... so this is actually simple and similar to UC1

giuseppe: is it worth to have UC2 as a separate UC? can we merge it with UC1

glenn: maybe still worth, in UC2 could have some privacy concerns,
... maybe I'm at a hotel room and I don't want to share my device preferences with the hotel TV set
... is there a standard to control a TV?

giuseppe: I agree there could be a gap here but aren't we extending the scope too much?

glenn: good point, but we can first collect the use cases and then make a final filtering at the end
... based on priorities
... move on on UC3

bill: so UC3, I have multiple devices in my home
... and I want to find content that is suitable for multiple devices
... e.g. I have a movie I want to watch

and I want to be able to make some sort of supersearch to know if that is playable on any of the device in the home

scribe: one option is to do multiple searches
... but that would be more cumbersome and I would have to repeat it for each device
... so would be more convenient to do one research for all, and would be also good to do it once but capture all the differences, e.g. in network connections and capabilites

glenn: so we need to be able to express playback capabilites, network capabilities, offline/online capabilites, in home/out of home capabilities
... an immediate gap I can see I'm not able to disambiguate between different search results, e.g. I have spiderman DVD VS spiderman on ABC
... so we don't have a standard to express different offers for the same content

bill: also from a content perspective, e.g. ad based VS pay
... now if I do local matching and filtering, I need to get all the info

<ldaigle> internet.net or whatever

<ldaigle> zero rating

<mark_vickers> who is here?

dale: we should also consider sponsorship
... ... e.g. if I'm part of a sponsor group I may get some content for free or at a better bandwith

glenn: so one think we would luck is a way to express a sponsorhip model

bill: would be a more complex version of the cost option

glenn: no more comments on UC1-3

<kaz> [ web&tv ig charter includes CEA and ATSC in the list of external groups to liaise ]

<kaz> [ while the liaison table has ATSC but not CEA ]

glenn: AP to explore potential liaison with CEA

glenn: I encourage all new members to read the GGIE main page for a better understanding of what we want to do and how we want to work, see here http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF
... in a nutshell, we now are trying to collect gaps, later we envision to send request to various groups

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/04/08 16:22:20 $