- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 03:09:00 +0900
- To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
Hi all, I've just noticed there was just an DOCX version of the proposal on CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API at: http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/RevisedAPI So just added a PDF version to the above Wiki page for convenience. Cheers, Kazuyuki On 08/03/2011 01:40 AM, Francois Daoust wrote: > Hi, > > The minutes of today's Home Networking Task Force are available at: > http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html > > ... and copied as raw text below. > > A number of issues were approved during the call, check resolutions taken in the minutes. > Giuseppe will integrate them in the requirements document. > > Thanks, > Francois. > > ----- > Home Networking Task Force Teleconference > > 02 Aug 2011 > > [2]Agenda > > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2011Aug/0010.html > > See also: [3]IRC log > > [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-irc > > Attendees > > Present > Giuseppe, Kazuyuki, MattH, Francois, David_Mays, Aizu, > Clarke_Stevens, Igarashi, Russell_Berkoff, mav > > Regrets > Chair > Giuseppe > > Scribe > Francois > > Contents > > * [4]Topics > 1. [5]TV Querying and Control > 2. [6]Time Synchronization (ISSUE-21) > 3. [7]Lip-Sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation (ISSUE-22) > 4. [8]UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support (ISSUE-23) > 5. [9]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Player > (ISSUE-26) > 6. [10]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Server > (ISSUE-27) > 7. [11]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media > Controller (ISSUE-28) > 8. [12]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Record > Controller (ISSUE-29) > 9. [13]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Device > Controller (ISSUE-30) > 10. [14]Next steps > 11. [15]CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API Proposal > * [16]Summary of Action Items > _________________________________________________________ > > <giuseppe> [17]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/2 > > [17] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/products/2 > > TV Querying and Control > > <giuseppe> ISSUE-20? > > <trackbot> ISSUE-20 -- TV Querying and Control -- open > > <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/20 > > [18] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/20 > > <MattH> > [19]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussio > ns/TVControl > > [19] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/TVControl > > matt: re-write proposal to better explain what could be > standardized. > ... The processing engine could be incorporated or not. > ... There were some questions I hope I've addressed. > > giuseppe: comments on this? > ... I don't have specific comments. I see different challenges. One > thing I noticed is that it does not follow the same approach as > other things we've discussed. > ... Not a generic approach. > ... On the use case, no problem it's fine. > ... Any other comment, or can we conclude it's approved? > > proposed RESOLUTION: approve ISSUE-20 > > RESOLUTION: approve ISSUE-20, TV Querying and Control > > <scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-20 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [20]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action01] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-58 - Integrate ISSUE-20 in requirements > spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > Time Synchronization (ISSUE-21) > > <MattH> > [21]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussio > ns/TimeSynchronisation > > [21] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/TimeSynchronisation > > matt: Same here, re-wrote to better explain what's up for > standardization. > ... Regarding the time sync use case, the idea is to make it > possible to be able to sync the content of their own app with the > content played on the TV set. > ... I believe we briefly described the prototype during the Berlin > Workshop. > ... Re-focusing is to highlight the fact that it's useful for an app > to have a simple and clear API to access this type of information. > ... It would be useful to have a high-level API that can enable > these kind of applications and that abstract away the possible > inconsistencies. > > Russell: I object, the existing discovery protocol address these > issues, so I believe it's out of scope. > > matt: I was referring to the previous situation. In the new version, > I refer to existing protocols that can be appropriate, so you're > right. > > Russell: ok. > > giuseppe: comments on the content of the issue? > ... then we can approve this as well > > RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-21, Time synchronization > > <scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-21 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [22]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action02] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-59 - Integrate ISSUE-21 in requirements > spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > giuseppe: for some of these use cases, there could be an entity on > the network that provides the service, so not necessarily a local > API > > Lip-Sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation (ISSUE-22) > > <MattH> > [23]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussio > ns/LipSyncTimeSynchronisation > > [23] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/LipSyncTimeSynchronisation > > <giuseppe> ISSUE-22? > > <trackbot> ISSUE-22 -- Lip-sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation -- > open > > <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/22 > > [24] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/22 > > matt: related but with emphasis on needs for precise timing > information, e.g. lip sync. > ... The description here makes explicit the need to expose the > accuracy that is available so that an app can determine whether it > can do its stuff. > > giuseppe: thanks, any comment on this? > ... OK, let's close this as well > > kaz: Matt, are you interested in not only lip-sync but also 3D, or > animation, audio frame, or other multiple modalities? > > matt: I think these should be valid. We were more interested in > audio at BBC, but I can see other purpose requiring accurate timing > sync for other modality, yes. > > RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-22, Lip-sync Accuracy Time Synchronisation > > <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-22 in requirements > spec. [recorded in > [25]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action03] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-60 - Integrate ISSUE-22 in requirements > spec. [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support (ISSUE-23) > > <giuseppe> ISSUE-23? > > <trackbot> ISSUE-23 -- UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support -- open > > <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/23 > > [26] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/23 > > Russell: Issue-23 is a use case to support the UPnP/DLNA ecosystem > devices as-is within an application. > ... There are a large number of currently deployed UPnP/DLNA > devices, and having W3C user agents be able to support those devices > would be beneficial for both orgs as well as for users. > > giuseppe: you didn't write any use case, right? > > russell: right. > ... It's just to generate a requirement. > ... There are specific use cases which are written later on, but > this is a specific use case to require UPnP/DLNA support. > > Giuseppe: no comment. Any comment? > > Russell: I think there should be a requirement that maps to this > issue. > > Giuseppe: OK, I can find a way to integrate that in requirements > spec. > > RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-23, UPnP/DLNA ecosystem support > > <scribe> ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-23 in requirements > spec. [recorded in > [27]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action04] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-61 - Integrate ISSUE-23 in requirements > spec. [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > kaz: comment on ISSUE-23. Clarify what you mean by W3C user agents? > > Russell: there are conceivably user agents that may not be browsers > but something else. > > kaz: In that case, W3C specification compliant user agents. W3C does > not produce user agents > > Russell: yes. > > Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Player (ISSUE-26) > > See [28]ISSUE-26 > > [28] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/26 > > Russell: question is whether it's enough to support various > protocols, or whether we need to dig up in types of services exposed > and expose e.g. media servers. > ... [Going through requirements]. Requirement to list content that > matches precise criteria on a media server for instance. Playback > operation. > ... View EPG data which may represent current content, also tune and > play live content, and then select and play recorded content. > > Giuseppe: back to ISSUE-26, any comment? > ... I don't think the use case is controversial. > ... No problem with the use case itself. > ... One problem I have with these use cases is that they all look > different. > ... We might want to re-write them for more consistency. > > Russell: I'm certainly willing to help. > ... I tried to make the use cases and requirements consistent. > > Giuseppe: ok. > > RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-26, Home Network Enabled User-Agent - > Network Media Player > > <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-26 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [29]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action05] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-62 - Integrate ISSUE-26 in requirements > spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Server (ISSUE-27) > > See [30]ISSUE-27 > > [30] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/27 > > Russell: companion use case to previous one, to be able to serve > content. > ... Media server not necessarily local, could be in the cloud. > > Giuseppe: there's a specific reference to DLNA in things to > standardize. > > Russell: I was just trying to clarify what the term Home Network > Media Transport Requirements might entail. > ... May I just change "mainly" into "possibly"? > ... It was really just meant as a clarification. > ... I'll go through the use case and take that out. > > Giuseppe: ok, fine. > > RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-27, Home Network Enabled User-Agent - > Network Media Server > > <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-27 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [31]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action06] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Integrate ISSUE-27 in requirements > spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Media Controller (ISSUE-28) > > See [32]ISSUE-28 > > [32] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/28 > > Russell: provides more details about what needs to be controlled on > media that provides rendering. > ... including closed captioning, camera angles, etc. > > Giuseppe: same as for ISSUE-27, DLNA mention remains. > > Russell: Yes, I'll go through all of these issues and adjust the > wording. > > Giuseppe: ok, also approved, then. > > RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-28, Home Network Enabled User-Agent - > Network Media Controller > > <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-28 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [33]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action07] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Integrate ISSUE-28 in requirements > spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Record Controller (ISSUE-29) > > See [34]ISSUE-29 > > [34] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/29 > > Russell: different scenarios on controlling recorder, listed on the > page. > > Giuseppe: Comments? > ... Approved. > > RESOLUTION: Approve ISSUE-29, Home Network Enabled User-Agent - > Network Record Controller > > <scribe> ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-29 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [35]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action08] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Integrate ISSUE-29 in requirements > spec [on Giuseppe Pascale - due 2011-08-09]. > > Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Device Controller (ISSUE-30) > > See [36]ISSUE-30 > > [36] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/30 > > Russell: Control of a device, which we don't know anything about. > There might be provisioning, e.g. home network management services > while upgrading firmware. There's a whole slew of device types on > top of media related services. > ... This is a use case to control all sorts of devices. > > Giuseppe: given that this is generic, and that we already have > approved generic use cases, does that add something? > > Russell: we do have Igarashi-san application use cases. But this is > more control of non media devices on the home network. > ... Usage will become increasibly important. > > Giuseppe: Yes, but requirements already covered by other issue, I > think. > ... High-level versus low-level. > > ISSUE-14? > > <trackbot> ISSUE-14 -- Document Discovering a Service -- closed > > <trackbot> [37]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/14 > > [37] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/14 > > <giuseppe> > [38]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Requireme > nts#U7._Application_Discovering_a_Service > > [38] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Requirements#U7._Application_Discovering_a_Service > > Giuseppe: The requirements doc is already updated to cover this. > > Russell: I might suggest that this gets merged with issue-14, > provided there are no new requirements. > ... One question that I have in mind. Is a device or service in > these use cases the same as the device in the use case I'm > providing? > ... I think Jean-Claude mentioned the definition of a device as a > list of services. > ... I'm a little concerned about the definition section in the > requirements doc. > > Giuseppe: it's for the scope of the document. > > Russell: I think we'll have to discuss devices vs. services > > Giuseppe: could you provide text for the requirements document? > > <scribe> ACTION: Russell to see if ISSUE-14 and ISSUE-30 can be > merged [recorded in > [39]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action09] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - See if ISSUE-14 and ISSUE-30 can be > merged [on Russell Berkoff - due 2011-08-09]. > > Next steps > > giuseppe: it would be nice to finish the document by the end of the > month. > ... I'll update it so that we can review it before the f2f meeting > and approve it during the meeting. > ... The idea would be to publish the requirements document, and then > to add some section in the IG report about our findings. > ... What should we do with CableLabs draft proposal? > ... We need to know what we're going to do with other documents such > as implementation alternatives. > > Clarke: hard to understand you right now, let's do a phone call and > come up with a plan or something. > > CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API Proposal > > Giuseppe: question, Clarke, is what should the group do with this? > > Clarke: I'd like people to comment on it, see if it meets > requirements. > > <kaz> [40]Wiki > > [40] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/RevisedAPI > > <kaz> issue-38? > > <trackbot> ISSUE-38 -- CableLabs Simplified Home Networking API > Proposal -- open > > <trackbot> [41]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/38 > > [41] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/38 > > Clarke: Then look at this proposal and the one from Opera, see if > they can be aligned. > ... I'm working on an update to that document, which I can publish > in the next couple of days. > > Giuseppe: [chunked], include in the report? > > Clarke: yes, I'd like to resolve as many obvious divergences as > possible and then include in the report. > > Russell: I'm not necessarily favoring an API the way you propose > [scribe missed precise concern] > > Clarke: when something is discovered, it calls a callback. I found > it useful to combine things, but you could have your user agent to > do otherwise. The basic idea of having discovery "routines" that > calls a callback is pretty generic and doesn't predict any specific > implementation. > ... The same goes for request. > ... If you want one callback for zeroconf, one for DLNA, etc. that's > fine. > > Russell: something like REST call, does that require a callback? > > Clarke: what happens is that you send a message, and when you get a > response, which is asynchronous, the callback gets called. A single > routine could handle all your REST responses, or different routines > could be used. > ... Still, you send a request, then get a response. > > Russell: I might suggest that you write this in "here's the usage > scenario" instead of providing an IDL, not very consistent with the > way we've approaches other use cases. > > Giuseppe: The goal is more to capture how this could be implemented. > ... It is not to become the specification, it's merely meant to > suggest how an API could be defined. > > Russell: I suspect there is a use case knocking around in this > document. I would encourage the writing of a use case based on this > document. One concern is what happens to one device discovered with > different methods? Is there a way to say that this is the same? > ... I think it raises some interesting questions. > > Clarke: It's one way to implement the requirements triggered by the > other use cases. It's certainly not the only one. > ... I'm uncertain how this should be communicated to any working > group that addresses these requirements. > > Giuseppe: my view on this is that we need to make sure the > discussions are reflected on this document, then we can decide to > publish it along with the requirements document to the intention of > a working group. > ... If it's already covered by another document, e.g. by Opera's > proposal, then maybe we can drop it. > ... We need to have opinions on this. > ... The same applies to the Security document, actually. > > Clarke: I'll try to write something that tries to align CableLabs > and Opera's proposals. > > Giuseppe: ok, running out of time, here. > > [call adjourned] > > <giuseppe> I hope you could hear what I was saying.... > > <giuseppe> I was using skype, next time I'll use the phone > > Summary of Action Items > > [NEW] ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-20 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [42]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action01] > [NEW] ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-21 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [43]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action02] > [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-22 in requirements spec. > [recorded in > [44]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action03] > [NEW] ACTION: giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-23 in requirements spec. > [recorded in > [45]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action04] > [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-26 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [46]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action05] > [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-27 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [47]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action06] > [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-28 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [48]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action07] > [NEW] ACTION: Giuseppe to integrate ISSUE-29 in requirements spec > [recorded in > [49]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action08] > [NEW] ACTION: Russell to see if ISSUE-14 and ISSUE-30 can be merged > [recorded in > [50]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/02-webtv-minutes.html#action09] > > [End of minutes] > > -- Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and Voice Tel: +81 466 49 1170
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 18:08:34 UTC