20:54:53 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #mediawg
20:54:53 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/05/11-mediawg-irc
20:54:57 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #mediawg
20:55:03 <tidoust> RRSAgent, make logs public
20:55:18 <tidoust> Meeting: Media WG call
20:55:45 <tidoust> Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/media-wg/blob/main/meetings/2021-05-11-Media_Working_Group_Teleconference-agenda.md#agenda
20:56:06 <tidoust> Chair: Chris, Jer
21:00:29 <tidoust> Present+ Francois_Daoust, Jer_Noble, Bernard_Aboba, Joey_Parrish, Matt_Wolenetz
21:01:02 <tidoust> Present+ Eric_Carlson
21:02:11 <tidoust> Present+ Chris_Needham, Gary_Katsevman, Peng_Liu, Tess_O_Connor
21:02:38 <tidoust> Present+ Chris_Cunningham
21:02:52 <pengliu> pengliu has joined #mediawg
21:04:24 <hober> present+
21:05:16 <tidoust> present+ Greg_Freedman, Xiaohan_Wang
21:05:19 <chcunningham> chcunningham has joined #mediawg
21:05:23 <chcunningham> present+
21:05:41 <gregwf> gregwf has joined #mediawg
21:05:53 <jernoble> jernoble has joined #mediawg
21:06:28 <hober> scribe: jernoble
21:07:08 <MattWolenetz_> MattWolenetz_ has joined #mediawg
21:07:10 <tidoust> Topic: Welcome Chris Needham as new co-chair of the Media WG
21:07:13 <MattWolenetz_> present+
21:07:30 <jernoble> jernoble: Welcome to chris as the new WG co-chair
21:07:35 <chcunningham> Welcome Chris!
21:07:47 <jernoble> chris: thank you to the previous chair, mounir, and thanks to everyone in the WG
21:08:05 <xhwang> xhwang has joined #mediawg
21:08:18 <tidoust> Topic: Autoplay policy detection status
21:08:25 <jernoble> chris: Agenda item #2: autoplay
21:08:37 <jernoble> chris: Gary asked about current status of the autoplay api
21:08:42 <tidoust> -> https://github.com/w3c/charter-media-wg/issues/24 Status of Autoplay Policy Detection
21:09:01 <jernoble> gary: still a pain point for developers; having an api to detect this policy would be useful
21:09:40 <jernoble> gary: sync vs. async was the previous hangup, the TAG was included, then the issue was dropped.
21:09:55 <jernoble> gary: is there anything else stopping work from progressing?
21:10:38 <jernoble> chris: other implementors were busy, looking for editors for the specification. Paul from Mozilla has a volunteer for an editor
21:10:46 <jernoble> q+
21:11:07 <tidoust> ack jernoble
21:11:09 <JoeyParrish> JoeyParrish has joined #mediawg
21:11:43 <jernoble> jernoble: no blocking issue from WebKit's POV
21:12:02 <jernoble> chris: next step is to find out from Mozilla the identity of the volunteer'd editor
21:12:31 <jernoble> tess: small spec, so it's fine to have a single editor; if we need a co-editor, we can find an editor from Apple
21:12:46 <jernoble> chris: that would be appreciated, thanks
21:13:09 <tidoust> Topic: EME status in the charter
21:13:10 <jernoble> chris: Agenda #3: EME charter status
21:13:12 <cpn> https://github.com/w3c/charter-media-wg/issues/19
21:13:36 <jernoble> chris: Q's about "find existing session" API.
21:14:03 <jernoble> joey: the original proposal is being backed out, and alternatives are being considered; greg suggested yet another alternative on the charter repo
21:14:26 <tidoust> q+
21:14:49 <jernoble> joey: greg and i need to get together to hash out alternatives; committed to doing privacy review as well
21:15:23 <jernoble> chris: can this be considered the same feature as key rotation?
21:15:45 <jernoble> joey: no, they're similar, but not really the same problem.
21:15:57 <jernoble> ack tidoust
21:16:33 <jernoble> tidoust: Interested in the charter space, rather than the implementation space. features need to be listed in the charter, and that's the driving question here
21:17:03 <jernoble> tidoust: there's a pull request on the charter, approved by joey, to remove this feature as a deliverable from the charter during this charter renewal
21:17:06 <JoeyParrish> q+
21:17:13 <jernoble> tidoust: is that acceptable to the WG?
21:17:38 <jernoble> chris: there's a huge debate on issue 132, many voices think this was important.
21:17:47 <jernoble> ack JoeyParrish
21:18:23 <jernoble> JoeyParrish: the importance hasn't changed, it's useful, people want it, and some DRM providers are doing it already.
21:18:53 <jernoble> JoeyParrish: it's not necessarily hurting applications, since the current implementations do this outside of the specification.
21:19:14 <jernoble> JoeyParrish: its' a matter of documenting current practice
21:19:16 <jernoble> q+
21:19:32 <jernoble> JoeyParrish: don't want to hold up the chartering process
21:19:37 <jernoble> ack jernoble
21:20:14 <tidoust> q+
21:20:22 <jernoble> jernoble: can we do this in a side spec
21:20:25 <jernoble> ack tidoust
21:20:43 <jernoble> tidoust: can it just be an informative document, that's a note rather than a normative spec?
21:20:47 <MattWolenetz_> q+
21:20:59 <jernoble> ack MattWolenetz_
21:21:19 <jernoble> MattWolenetz_: is there implications around IP / patent exclusions
21:21:45 <jernoble> tidoust: if it's informative, it's not covered; a CG report will be slightly better because it would be covered by the IP policy of the CG
21:22:35 <jernoble> jernoble: shouldn't need to decide CG vs Informative note now, as neither blocks the charter
21:23:26 <jernoble> tidoust: starting the final review by W3C mgmt of the re-charter, if all goes fine we can send the draft to the AC for review. at the same time, we'll have to extend the current charter to cover the gap between the old and new charters.
21:23:51 <jernoble> Agenda 4: w3c/mediasession#264 Add new actions to support video conferencing websites - steimelchrome
21:23:57 <cpn> https://github.com/w3c/mediasession/issues/264
21:24:20 <tidoust> s/Agenda 4/Topic
21:25:09 <jernoble> chris: no representation from those on the thread in the issues; tabling
21:25:12 <tidoust> Topic: Status update on WebCodecs
21:25:28 <jernoble> chris: can the editors share an update on the current status of WebCodecs
21:25:47 <hober> s/tabling/deferring/
21:26:31 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: lots of feedback, incorporated into the specification
21:27:01 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: origin trial for Chrome has shown that current approach works
21:27:32 <tidoust> -> https://github.com/w3c/webcodecs/issues List of WebCodecs issues
21:27:45 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: would like to triage the bugs into the "bug" category and "breaking changes" category so we can prioritize the latter
21:28:12 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: encourage WG to look at the issues in the latter list and provide feedback
21:28:48 <tidoust> -> https://github.com/w3c/webcodecs/milestone/2 V1 Launch Blockers
21:28:49 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: video frame readback is a pain point for adopters
21:29:38 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: window vs. worker exposure is an open issue that has a lot of comments
21:30:12 <tidoust> q+
21:30:54 <jernoble> chris: now that the spec is inside the WG, how much would you like to discuss the issues inside the telecon?
21:31:39 <jernoble> chris: consider this an invitation to bring these issues to the telecon to discuss and drive consensus on these contentious issues.
21:32:09 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: haven't prepared to bring these issues to the WG, and not all interested parties are represented
21:32:31 <jernoble> bernard: we would like the discussion to occur in the MediaWG rather than in WebRTC
21:33:06 <jernoble> bernard: makes the conversation difficult to manage, and the consensus needs to happen in the relevant WG
21:33:39 <jernoble> bernard: "breakout box" => "media stream track insertable" => ... (lost0
21:33:53 <jernoble> chris: which group does that live in?
21:34:25 <jernoble> bernard: not an item of WebRTC WG; to some extent it's orthogonal to WebCodecs; not needed to render or to input (though convenient)
21:34:55 <jernoble> bernard: shares some elements with WebCodecs (due to shared objects like "VideoFrame")
21:36:22 <jernoble> chris: Q re: the privacy review; is there anything you'd like to raise?
21:37:21 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: had a meeting with the PING; went through the review point by point and resolved to file individual GitHub issues or simple follow ups; updates needed to the Privacy Considerations section of the spec
21:37:55 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: other specifications have listed mitigations that the PING feel more straightforward that the PING think the WebCodecs spec can incorporate
21:38:26 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: many of the fingerprinting areas are not new/shared with other specs like WebRTC and MediaCapabilities; others are new and we are sensitive to that
21:39:10 <jernoble> bernard: in terms of incremental exposure; the list of supported codecs is already available from existing APIs
21:39:44 <zacharycava> zacharycava has joined #mediawg
21:39:48 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: you can become aware of hardware or platform differences above and beyond supported codecs
21:40:07 <jernoble> MattWolenetz_: broader encoder support in these implementations than exists on the platform ATM
21:40:30 <jernoble> ack tidoust
21:41:04 <jernoble> tidoust: WebGPU has not gone through privacy review yet; not the best example; neither WebGL
21:41:28 <jernoble> tidoust: are we looking at the right list for the blocking issues? the window-vs
21:41:39 <jernoble> ...worker item is not in the blocker list
21:42:15 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: i do consider that issue to be a breaking change; not intentionally omitted from the breaking changes list
21:42:32 <jernoble> q+
21:42:56 <jernoble> bernard: that original bug came in through breakout box; that wasn't intended and may be why that discussion started
21:43:18 <jernoble> tidoust: many untrained issues in the spec tracker; are those considered minor?
21:43:54 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: process is to do a weekly triage; some may have been missed
21:44:12 <jernoble> bernard: many of the issues are documentation issues (rather than implementation issues)[
21:44:22 <jernoble> bernard: many are just questions
21:44:54 <cpn> q?
21:45:19 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: there are other issues, like missing any mention of color spaces
21:45:55 <jernoble> bernard: many of the tags don't represent W3C spec status; some may be CR blockers but not V1 launch blockers
21:46:21 <jernoble> tidoust: that activity is great, but the volume of activity makes it hard to follow
21:46:57 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: I'd be happy to add a label to issues for extension vs. blocker
21:48:45 <tidoust> RRSAgent, draft minutes
21:48:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/05/11-mediawg-minutes.html tidoust
21:48:51 <jernoble> jernoble: is anyone using this api on the main thread? if not, could we just ship with the worker at first and add to the window?
21:49:02 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: i'll do this research and get back to the WG
21:49:40 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: this issue took us by surprise
21:49:46 <tidoust> present+ Zachary_Cava, Mounir_Lamouri
21:50:18 <jernoble> bernard: usually this is a security issue, but there's no security issue at hand here
21:51:03 <jernoble> tidoust: when you say "shipping a V1", you're referring to doing so outside of an origin trial?
21:51:04 <jernoble> chris_cunningham: yes.
21:51:08 <cpn> q?
21:51:14 <jernoble> ack jernoble
21:51:19 <tidoust> s/tidoust:/cpn:/
21:53:12 <jernoble> chris: around media session, mounir is currently named as a spec editor? is this something you're interested in continuing or are you looking for a replacement?
21:53:31 <jernoble> mounir: I'm happy to stay, but also happy to hand off work if there's another interested WG member?
21:54:46 <jernoble> mounir: ideally need a replacement  editor, perhaps even two.
22:06:55 <cpn> rrsagent, draft minutes
22:06:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/05/11-mediawg-minutes.html cpn