IRC log of mediafrag on 2011-11-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

09:57:42 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #mediafrag

09:57:42 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/11/23-mediafrag-irc

09:57:43 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs public

09:57:44 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #mediafrag

09:57:45 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be IA_MFWG

09:57:46 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see IA_MFWG()5:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes

09:57:46 [trackbot]

Meeting: Media Fragments Working Group Teleconference

09:57:46 [trackbot]

Date: 23 November 2011

09:58:10 [raphael]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2011Nov/0057.html

09:58:25 [raphael]

RRSAgent, make logs public

09:58:32 [raphael]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

09:58:32 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/23-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael

09:58:45 [raphael]

zakim, code?

09:58:45 [Zakim]

the conference code is 3724 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), raphael

10:00:15 [Zakim]

IA_MFWG()5:00AM has now started

10:00:24 [Zakim]

+ +61.2.801.2.aaaa

10:00:32 [silvia]

zakim, aaaa is me

10:00:32 [Zakim]

+silvia; got it

10:01:23 [doublec]

I'm here but not on phone, sorry

10:01:57 [raphael]

Regrets: Erik

10:02:10 [Zakim]

+ +33.4.93.00.aabb

10:02:15 [tomayac]

tomayac has joined #mediafrag

10:02:24 [raphael]

Present: Silvia, Chris (irc), Raphael, Thomas, Davy

10:02:49 [raphael]

zakim, aabb is me

10:02:49 [Zakim]

+raphael; got it

10:03:02 [Zakim]

+Yves

10:03:10 [Zakim]

-raphael

10:03:35 [Zakim]

+ +1.404.978.aacc

10:03:41 [Zakim]

+Raphael

10:03:49 [tomayac]

zakim, +1.404.978.aacc is me

10:03:49 [Zakim]

+tomayac; got it

10:04:06 [raphael]

RRSAgent, draft minutes

10:04:06 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/23-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael

10:04:15 [raphael]

zakim, who is here?

10:04:15 [Zakim]

On the phone I see silvia, Yves, tomayac, Raphael

10:04:16 [Zakim]

On IRC I see tomayac, Zakim, RRSAgent, raphael, silvia, doublec, foolip, rektide, trackbot, Yves

10:04:25 [raphael]

Present+ Yves

10:04:42 [raphael]

Topic: 1. Admin

10:05:14 [silvia]

zakim, mute me

10:05:14 [Zakim]

silvia should now be muted

10:05:33 [raphael]

Next Tuesday, the specification will be published as a CR

10:05:38 [silvia]

yay!

10:05:45 [davy]

davy has joined #mediafrag

10:06:05 [doublec]

great!

10:06:11 [raphael]

Raphael: the group will be closed at the end of the year

10:06:45 [Zakim]

+ +329331aadd

10:07:16 [raphael]

... we need to satisfy the exit criteria of CR, i.e. getting 2 implementations of all features to move forward

10:07:50 [raphael]

... Goal: we jhave

10:08:21 [raphael]

... about 10 test cases to approve for the UA

10:08:32 [raphael]

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases.html

10:08:42 [foolip]

Will we consider polyfills implementations, or only native browser/server implementations?

10:08:56 [tomayac]

hooray for polyfills ;-)

10:09:19 [raphael]

not only browser implementations, but all, including polyfills

10:09:44 [raphael]

Thomas work should be included in an implementation report

10:09:46 [silvia]

foolip: it's the W3C :-)

10:09:47 [foolip]

You'd never get away with that if it were for any other browser feature, say document.querySelector.

10:10:10 [silvia]

foolip: that's the HTML WG :-)

10:10:34 [raphael]

Thomas: I think they should be a valid implementation

10:10:50 [raphael]

Raphael: how much time you have to work on an implementation report?

10:10:56 [foolip]

I think polyfills are great and useful, and respect tomayac's work, but don't think it's acceptable.

10:11:46 [foolip]

In other words, if there are any features which don't have 2 implementation not counting polyfills, they should be dropped from the spec.

10:12:04 [raphael]

why don't you want to count the polyfills Philip ? I don't get this ...

10:12:07 [foolip]

Specifically #track cannot be done with a polyfill yet

10:12:11 [tomayac]

http://tomayac.com/mediafragments/implementationtests.html

10:12:13 [raphael]

they are absolutely valid implementations

10:13:10 [foolip]

The point of requiring implementations is to prove that it's possible to implement and ship. polyfills don't prove that, they don't have to deal with all of the internal issues you'd find in a native implementation

10:14:12 [tomayac]

foolip, i fully agree

10:14:21 [raphael]

ACTION: Davy starting from http://tomayac.com/mediafragments/implementationtests.html to generate a EARL report

10:14:22 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-241 - Starting from http://tomayac.com/mediafragments/implementationtests.html to generate a EARL report [on Davy Van Deursen - due 2011-11-30].

10:14:24 [tomayac]

we're discussing your points

10:15:13 [tomayac]

foolip, raphael postponed the discussion to later in the call

10:15:26 [raphael]

Topic: UA Test Cases

10:15:28 [raphael]

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases.html

10:15:42 [raphael]

Only the reviewed test cases are used in the implementation report

10:15:50 [davy]

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/results/ua/SynoteMediaFragmentPlayer-report

10:15:52 [doublec]

an example of an issue might be hitting the 'end' time in temporal fragments. The HTML media API doesn't provide a way to immediately stop playback on an end time which a polyfill will have trouble doing.

10:15:53 [raphael]

Davy: no, the non reviewed test cases are also used

10:16:19 [doublec]

whereas a native api can get to the low level (hopefully) to do it

10:17:03 [raphael]

Davy: the individual implementation reports contain all test cases

10:17:13 [raphael]

... but the global report only take the reviewed test cases

10:17:53 [raphael]

Raphael: the unreviewed TC starts at TC0095 until TC0102

10:17:58 [raphael]

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases.html

10:18:13 [raphael]

... 8 test cases

10:19:41 [foolip]

doublec, does Firefox support stopping at the (exact) end time?

10:19:52 [doublec]

I would argue that a testcase that uses smpte on a webm file doesn't seem to make sense, given that webm is not fixed framerate

10:20:01 [doublec]

(referring to tc0100-ua and friends)

10:20:09 [doublec]

foolip: it's close but not exact

10:20:13 [foolip]

I agree, it seems to me there are no implementations of smpte

10:20:16 [silvia]

q+

10:20:18 [doublec]

foolip: and depends on audio buffering on platforms

10:20:21 [davy]

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases#TC0095-UA

10:20:23 [raphael]

ACTION: Davy to contact Jack to get media resources to test TC0099 and TC0100

10:20:23 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-242 - Contact Jack to get media resources to test TC0099 and TC0100 [on Davy Van Deursen - due 2011-11-30].

10:20:28 [silvia]

zakim, unmute me

10:20:28 [Zakim]

silvia should no longer be muted

10:20:30 [foolip]

doublec, fair enough :)

10:20:45 [doublec]

foolip: which is why I knew that was a sticky point :)

10:21:18 [foolip]

doublec, does currentTime lie or will it overshoot somewhat?

10:22:13 [tomayac]

currentTime is best effort i'd say

10:22:33 [doublec]

foolip it's supposed to be accurate but one of our audio backends cheats and only updates it after a blocking audio write on a thread is completed

10:22:47 [doublec]

foolip: so is limited to the granularity of the amount of that write (this is linux)

10:23:11 [doublec]

foolip: on android it's a complete guess

10:23:15 [erik]

erik has joined #mediafrag

10:23:23 [foolip]

doublec, ok, I won't object on the basis of that, seems like a QoI issue

10:23:29 [doublec]

yeah

10:23:36 [tomayac]

timeupdate has no guarantees at all

10:23:50 [doublec]

right, timeupdate is often 250ms

10:24:10 [tomayac]

so frame-level addressing is completely impossible

10:24:14 [silvia]

I have a problem with failing on all non-matching SMPTE formats

10:24:18 [davy]

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases#TC0099-UA

10:24:30 [erik]

rrsagent, draft minutes

10:24:30 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/23-mediafrag-minutes.html erik

10:24:37 [doublec]

tomayac: you can get better granuality doing a setInterval and checking currentTime

10:24:46 [doublec]

tomayac: depending on implementation

10:24:49 [tomayac]

yepp, but again w/o guarantees

10:24:53 [doublec]

right

10:24:57 [raphael]

Chair: Raphael

10:25:11 [raphael]

Present+ Philip (irc)

10:25:19 [tomayac]

so all that seems to make sense (and this is the only thing i've seen people use) is 1s granualarity

10:25:48 [erik]

Present+ Erik

10:26:32 [tomayac]

<video> abstracts away the codec details, so can't get down to frame-level, no notion of key frames, etc. and that's a good thing imho :-)

10:27:04 [silvia]

OK, I can live with failing on non-matching SMPTE formats

10:27:07 [raphael]

Davy: http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases#TC0095-UA

10:27:28 [silvia]

I'm hoping there won't be much use of SMPTE anyway

10:27:37 [raphael]

ok, and reviewed

10:27:45 [raphael]

davy: http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases#TC0096-UA

10:28:55 [tomayac]

silvia, all i've seen people use is npt, and all with seconds

10:29:03 [raphael]

ok, and reviewed (the media resource has indeed those 2 tracks)

10:29:15 [raphael]

Davy: http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases#TC0097-UA

10:29:24 [silvia]

tomayac: yes, me too, and I've seen live streaming ppl ask for clock, but not smpte

10:29:25 [tomayac]

i normalize npt in non-second format to seconds, which makes it easier w/ html5 video

10:29:39 [raphael]

ok, and reviewed

10:29:49 [raphael]

Davy: http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases#TC0098-UA

10:30:33 [raphael]

ok, and reviewed

10:30:52 [tomayac]

imho, whatever currentTime accepts, dictates what we should do in practice (except for live streams of course)

10:31:10 [raphael]

Silvia: how the UA determines that the fragment is outside?

10:31:22 [raphael]

Davy: with the decoding pipeline, the UA knows the resolution of the video

10:32:01 [raphael]

... I will write in the HTML what is the resolution of the media resource (already written in the rdf file)

10:32:04 [silvia]

can we add that resolution to the example so it's clear it's outside?

10:32:08 [silvia]

thx

10:32:47 [raphael]

Davy: http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/TC/ua-test-cases#TC0101-UA

10:33:24 [raphael]

... in fact 101 is incomplete since there is no name in the webm resource

10:33:44 [raphael]

... we have to create such a resource

10:33:50 [raphael]

Davy: how can I create this resource

10:34:03 [doublec]

webm doesn't provide the ability to do that

10:34:07 [raphael]

Silvia: using mkv merge ?

10:34:14 [doublec]

afaik

10:34:18 [silvia]

WebM chaptering: http://matroska.org/technical/specs/chapters/index.html

10:34:24 [doublec]

that's matroska

10:34:27 [doublec]

is that included in webm?

10:34:29 [silvia]

well, it's Matroska but would work in webm

10:34:33 [doublec]

nope

10:34:43 [doublec]

if it's not in the webm spec, it's not supported

10:34:46 [silvia]

not per spec, but with most tools :)

10:35:09 [Zakim]

+tomayac.a

10:35:19 [silvia]

so, also, there is work happening on putting WebVTT into WebM, so that would likely be the better way in future

10:35:43 [raphael]

Raphael: 102 has the same problem

10:35:52 [raphael]

Davy: I will color the table in red

10:36:45 [Yves]

1/me taht would be great!

10:37:00 [Yves]

s/1\/me taht would be great!//

10:37:49 [raphael]

Silvia: at some point, OGG and WebM should have WebVTT so chapter names

10:37:57 [raphael]

... in the future, those test cases would be plausible

10:38:02 [raphael]

... hard to make the media resources now

10:38:29 [silvia]

and Apple also wants to put WebVTT into MP4 tracks

10:38:40 [raphael]

Raphael: if no test case for the ID dimension and no implemenati

10:38:43 [silvia]

right now you could use quicktime chapter markers in MP4 if you wanted to

10:39:02 [raphael]

s/implemenati/implementation, then this feature will be removed from the spec

10:39:39 [Yves]

in CR we document what might be removed if not implemented

10:39:42 [Yves]

or not implementable

10:40:22 [davy]

Silvia, sounds good, I will try QuickTime to create such a MP4

10:44:24 [raphael]

ACTION: Silvia to search for a media resource that contains a chapter name

10:44:25 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-243 - Search for a media resource that contains a chapter name [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2011-11-30].

10:44:42 [raphael]

Topic: 3. Status of the Implementation Report

10:44:53 [silvia]

I made a point that we should not remove features from the specification that cannot now be demonstrated because we don't have the file formats for the Web yet

10:44:57 [davy]

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-impl/

10:45:19 [silvia]

If such features cannot go into REC, at least a TR or CR should continue to exist with these extra features

10:45:28 [raphael]

Davy: we will have 4 different implm

10:45:37 [silvia]

zakim, mute me

10:45:37 [Zakim]

silvia should now be muted

10:45:37 [raphael]

s/implm/implementations with Thomas

10:46:28 [raphael]

Davy: currently, 3 levels: passed, failed and not applicable meaning not yet implemented

10:46:37 [raphael]

... should the not applicable be just failed ones?

10:47:08 [Yves]

having a new status 'not implemented' might be the best

10:47:18 [raphael]

Thomas: make a distinction between the implemented but failed and the not implemented

10:47:28 [silvia]

agree

10:48:19 [raphael]

Davy: are we the first group to face this problem? In EARL there is not yet implemented status available

10:49:38 [erik]

q+

10:49:44 [raphael]

Raphael: I suggest to add a paragraph in the report to explain what Passed, Failed and Not Applicable

10:49:50 [raphael]

zakim, ack silvia

10:49:50 [Zakim]

unmuting silvia

10:49:51 [Zakim]

I see erik on the speaker queue

10:49:56 [raphael]

zakim, ack erik

10:49:56 [Zakim]

I see no one on the speaker queue

10:49:56 [silvia]

zakim, mute me

10:49:58 [Zakim]

silvia should now be muted

10:50:49 [raphael]

Erik: all features which are weakly or not implemented should be marked at risk

10:51:02 [raphael]

... this is the case for the clock unit for specifying time for example

10:51:51 [raphael]

Raphael: I'm going to Davy and Chris, is clock something you plan to cover in your implementation?

10:52:01 [silvia]

you need a streaming server for the clock unit, realistically

10:52:10 [doublec]

raphael: no plans at this stage

10:52:13 [raphael]

Davy: we do that on the server

10:52:26 [silvia]

we could ask Thomas Vander Stichele about that - he has previously implemented such a feature

10:52:37 [silvia]

there was a thread on our mailing list at one stage

10:53:20 [doublec]

raphael: mainly because we don't support any video playback that'd make it useful

10:53:38 [doublec]

raphael: if we were to add such, I'd look at supporting it

10:53:42 [raphael]

Could you respond to this old thread, silvia, and re-activate this oc

10:53:49 [raphael]

s/oc/contact?

10:54:20 [silvia]

let me try...

10:55:06 [raphael]

Topic: 4. AOB

10:55:44 [raphael]

Erik: we had 3 actions from yesterday

10:56:00 [raphael]

... 2 minor edits ... done by Raphael

10:56:06 [raphael]

... a last one for the WAI WG

10:56:42 [raphael]

... Silvia, the track dimension is important for the a11y community, the mgt suggest to write a mail to the WAI WG to tell them this feature is at risk in Media fragment

10:56:58 [silvia]

zakim, unmute me

10:56:58 [Zakim]

silvia should no longer be muted

10:58:29 [raphael]

Raphael: how important is this feature (track) for WAI?

10:58:51 [raphael]

Silvia: it is not that much WAI at the moment, but more the HTML WG

10:59:16 [raphael]

... the track element in the media API

10:59:35 [doublec]

right, we need the track HTML stuff to be implemented before doing the media fragment track support

11:00:13 [raphael]

Silvia: the track element is a textual track, it is for WebVTT

11:00:40 [raphael]

Thomas: latest Chromium has track support ... not sure for which format

11:00:58 [raphael]

Raphael: why browsers need to support the track element to support the media fragment track?

11:01:14 [raphael]

Silvia: because we need to expose what are the available tracks

11:01:21 [doublec]

silvia: I was referring to http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#media-resources-with-multiple-media-tracks

11:03:17 [doublec]

raphael: when I wrote 'we' I really meant 'I'. And I mean the person working on track support needs to do it before I work on adding media fragment track support (assuming they don't)

11:03:29 [doublec]

raphael: (in firefox that is)

11:03:58 [Zakim]

-silvia

11:04:08 [silvia]

I agree, that's what I was pointing out: we need #track for the multitrack API in HTML5

11:04:12 [foolip]

Opera is similar, we couldn't support #track without first doing all the hard work to support the VideoTrack/AudioTrack APIs

11:04:20 [raphael]

Raphael: my question Chris is ... assuming the UA know what are the tracks available in a given media resource, how much implementation is to enable the selection of one of the tracks?

11:05:14 [doublec]

raphael: I don't know yet - we don't expose tracks at all

11:05:49 [silvia]

example is in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#assigning-a-media-controller-declaratively

11:07:11 [raphael]

ACTION: Erik to mail implementers the likelihood to get the remaining features implemented in the coming weeks

11:07:11 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-244 - Mail implementers the likelihood to get the remaining features implemented in the coming weeks [on Erik Mannens - due 2011-11-30].

11:07:23 [Zakim]

-Yves

11:07:25 [raphael]

meeting adjourned

11:07:29 [Zakim]

-Davy

11:07:47 [raphael]

RRSAgent, make minutes

11:07:47 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/23-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael

11:12:17 [davy]

davy has left #mediafrag

11:13:02 [Zakim]

-Raphael

11:14:31 [raphael]

ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics

11:14:32 [raphael]

RRSAgent, make minutes

11:14:32 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/23-mediafrag-minutes.html raphael

11:17:30 [erik]

erik has joined #mediafrag

12:33:41 [Zakim]

-tomayac

12:38:42 [Zakim]

disconnecting the lone participant, tomayac.a, in IA_MFWG()5:00AM

12:38:44 [Zakim]

IA_MFWG()5:00AM has ended

12:38:46 [Zakim]

Attendees were +61.2.801.2.aaaa, silvia, +33.4.93.00.aabb, raphael, Yves, tomayac, +329331aadd, Davy

13:01:33 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #mediafrag