IRC log of mediawg on 2021-11-09
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 21:58:08 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #mediawg
- 21:58:08 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/11/09-mediawg-irc
- 21:58:12 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #mediawg
- 21:59:24 [tidoust]
- tidoust has joined #mediawg
- 22:00:58 [tidoust]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 22:00:58 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/09-mediawg-minutes.html tidoust
- 22:01:30 [tidoust]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 22:01:50 [cyril_]
- cyril_ has joined #mediawg
- 22:01:56 [tidoust]
- Meeting: Media WG Teleconference
- 22:01:59 [tidoust]
- Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/media-wg/blob/main/meetings/2021-11-09-Media_Working_Group_Teleconference-agenda.md
- 22:02:03 [tidoust]
- Chair: Chris, Jer
- 22:02:45 [markw]
- markw has joined #mediawg
- 22:02:45 [tidoust]
- Present+ Francois_Daoust, Alastor_Wu, Chris_Needham, Cyril_Concolato, Eric_Carlson, Jer_Noble, Mark_Watson, Matt_Wolenetz, Peng_Liu,
- 22:02:55 [tidoust]
- present+ Greg_Freedman
- 22:03:22 [tidoust]
- present+ Thomas_Guilbert
- 22:04:17 [tidoust]
- present+ Jean-Yves_Avenard
- 22:04:43 [peng]
- peng has joined #mediawg
- 22:04:51 [tidoust]
- present+ Gary_Katsevman, Chris_Cunningham
- 22:05:34 [Cyril__]
- Cyril__ has joined #Mediawg
- 22:06:45 [cyril___]
- cyril___ has joined #mediawg
- 22:06:54 [jernoble]
- jernoble has joined #mediawg
- 22:07:14 [chcunningham]
- chcunningham has joined #mediawg
- 22:07:17 [tidoust]
- scribe: chcunningham
- 22:07:26 [cpn]
- scribe+ cpn
- 22:07:49 [cpn]
- Topic: requestVideoFrameCallback
- 22:08:19 [tidoust]
- -> Moving video.requestVideoFrameCallback spec to media WG https://github.com/w3c/media-wg/issues/34
- 22:08:24 [chcunningham]
- tguilbert: current state is that rVFC is shipped in chrome
- 22:08:37 [chcunningham]
- ... get a callback next time video frame is presented to compositor.
- 22:08:50 [chcunningham]
- ... adds metadata about that frame that is otherwise unavailable. including rtc things
- 22:09:09 [chcunningham]
- ... can be used for measuring glass-to-glass latency
- 22:09:31 [chcunningham]
- ... can be used to get callbacks at rate of video frame rate
- 22:09:33 [hober]
- present+
- 22:09:43 [chcunningham]
- ... no other browsers implemented yet. Safari asked a few questions
- 22:10:08 [chcunningham]
- ... up next: considering adding an extra parameter to get the actual VideoFrame (webcodecs interface)
- 22:10:46 [chcunningham]
- cpn: seen some suggestion from html folks that this should move to html
- 22:11:19 [jernoble]
- q+
- 22:11:28 [tidoust]
- ack jernoble
- 22:12:12 [chcunningham]
- jer: what are the use cases for emitting a WebCodecs frame? beyond that: not seeing anything that media wg must own here, unless we take over all of media element from html
- 22:12:52 [chcunningham]
- cpn: would it be acceptable for html to reference webcodecs?
- 22:12:57 [chcunningham]
- tguilbert: unclear
- 22:13:35 [chcunningham]
- tguilbert: getting the frame that was painted adds feature not currently feasible with WebCodecs
- 22:14:08 [chcunningham]
- ... can presently construct VideoFrame(<video>), but this affords means to be confident that the frame they have metadata for is the frame they're constructing
- 22:14:43 [MattWolenetz]
- q+ to say some clarification on a rVFC use-case
- 22:15:09 [chcunningham]
- jer: could we spec webcodecs to say that if you paint during this run loop that its syncronized w/ what you might get from rVFC?
- 22:16:19 [chcunningham]
- tguilbert: no way to address these races w/ WebCodecs without synchronizing multiple threads
- 22:16:31 [chcunningham]
- ... happy to follow up on these technical details
- 22:17:14 [chcunningham]
- cpn: currently not in wg, IIUC we would need to recharter to take this on
- 22:17:37 [chcunningham]
- ... option open to us. should we run a cfc on the venue?
- 22:18:08 [chcunningham]
- tguilbert: youenn initially asked this, said he would be fine to move to html
- 22:18:09 [eric]
- eric has joined #mediawg
- 22:18:10 [tidoust]
- ack MattWolenetz
- 22:18:10 [Zakim]
- MattWolenetz, you wanted to say some clarification on a rVFC use-case
- 22:19:38 [cpn]
- chcunningham: This API, were it extended, it would give you the metadata it's describing
- 22:21:08 [cpn]
- ... What are the practical implications?
- 22:21:35 [cpn]
- cpn: WG provides a venue for discussion. HTML you'd work with the editors there to integrate the spec
- 22:22:23 [cpn]
- chcunningham: I'm happy to move to HTML, seems straightforward from a process standpoint
- 22:22:54 [chcunningham]
- cpn: can record that as proposed resolution
- 22:23:13 [chcunningham]
- ... give folks offline chance to weigh in
- 22:23:38 [gregwf]
- gregwf has joined #mediawg
- 22:23:39 [chcunningham]
- ... no formal steps from w3c pov since this isn't yet in WG
- 22:24:35 [chcunningham]
- RESOLUTION: lets move this to HTML wg
- 22:25:08 [cpn]
- Topic: Autoplay Policy Detection
- 22:25:36 [chcunningham]
- cpn: alwu has been putting together a draft. can you summarize current state, open questions?
- 22:26:32 [chcunningham]
- alwu: Draft available. API lets devs know if they can play. Underlying decision currently very UA specific (engagment, user gesture, ...)
- 22:26:50 [chcunningham]
- ... so this lets devs know whether they should do things like present image vs start video w/ muted audio
- 22:26:55 [chcunningham]
- ... several open questions
- 22:27:11 [cpn]
- https://alastor0325.github.io/autoplay/
- 22:27:11 [chcunningham]
- ... 2 apis. 1 on media element. another on the document.
- 22:27:33 [chcunningham]
- alwu: for media element, policy can differ by browser.
- 22:27:43 [chcunningham]
- ... for web audio, it is actually spelled out in the spec
- 22:28:14 [chcunningham]
- ... previous consenus: web audio folks want to use document api
- 22:28:25 [chcunningham]
- ... but my pov, document API is not very clear
- 22:29:16 [cpn]
- q?
- 22:29:41 [chcunningham]
- ... for ex: stickiness of user gesture may not describe web audio policy (scribe: a little lost)
- 22:30:34 [chcunningham]
- ... current API proposal isn't a great fit to accommodate all the various browsers behaviors
- 22:30:52 [chcunningham]
- ... one path may be to put a policy attribute on AudioContext
- 22:32:36 [chcunningham]
- jer: one path might be to make a new API that consumes <audio> or WebAudio as input and gives answer
- 22:32:56 [chcunningham]
- alwu: we're open to it, but not sure how other participants feel
- 22:33:27 [cpn]
- chcunningham: From the Chrome point of view, you'd need to talk to Frank, who's not on this call
- 22:34:16 [jya_]
- jya_ has joined #mediawg
- 22:34:28 [chcunningham]
- gkatsev: from user perspective, an API where you could pass things in seems reasonable
- 22:34:37 [chcunningham]
- ... nice consistency
- 22:35:21 [cpn]
- chcunningham: In the previous discussions, are you converging on a design, or are there any sticking points?
- 22:36:01 [chcunningham]
- alwu: current state on PR. dale reviewed, was feeling positive, but left for PTO
- 22:37:03 [cpn]
- chcunningham: Frank is our representative for this topic. So you're now waiting for review feedback from Frank?
- 22:37:47 [cpn]
- ... I'll follow up with Frank
- 22:39:15 [chcunningham]
- cpn: suggestion on PR - it's quite long with lots of threaded comments. you may try merging it and then taking individual points of feedback
- 22:39:22 [chcunningham]
- ... as editor you have that freedom
- 22:40:29 [cpn]
- chcunningham: We had similar with Web Codecs. I tried to have conversations in GitHub issues. Chris's suggestion is fine if it helps
- 22:43:17 [chcunningham]
- cpn: HTML editors asked whether this should be integrated into HTML.
- 22:43:43 [chcunningham]
- ... could be standalone if we pursue what Jer suggested
- 22:43:48 [jernoble]
- q?
- 22:43:50 [jernoble]
- q+
- 22:44:04 [chcunningham]
- ... my view: lets iterate on the spec a bit more first
- 22:44:57 [chcunningham]
- wolenetz: another consideration is review audience - which group is best to review
- 22:45:19 [chcunningham]
- jernoble: happy to have it media for now, move to html later if needed
- 22:46:12 [cpn]
- Topic: Process 2021 and registries
- 22:46:49 [chcunningham]
- cpn: w3c process introduced a new "registry" track
- 22:46:58 [MattWolenetz]
- q+ to ask about registry and patent policies for externally referenced items (codecs, formats, etc)
- 22:47:00 [chcunningham]
- ... are we automatically adopting this process?
- 22:47:49 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: I think so. And I think we're allowed to update current registries without changing our charter. But I need to double check.
- 22:48:20 [chcunningham]
- cpn: so rather than calling documents "notes", we call the "registry" or "registry entry"
- 22:48:24 [chcunningham]
- ... are there additional requirements?
- 22:48:49 [MattWolenetz]
- q+ to ask also about "and must not contain any requirements on implementations."
- 22:48:55 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: no. process defines exactly what registries should contain, but I think we're already meeting those requirements
- 22:50:05 [chcunningham]
- cpn: so for WebCodecs registry, should be straightforward. Just changing the title? Are there other editorial tasks?
- 22:50:39 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: should be just a handful of minor edits to the document
- 22:50:42 [tidoust]
- https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#switching-tracks
- 22:50:43 [MattWolenetz]
- q+ to ask further about provision of registry data (required in the report or section) -- these are currently distinct notes, e.g. MSE ISOBMFF vs MSE WebM etc.
- 22:51:32 [chcunningham]
- cpn: is there an option to continue w/ notes? or are we expected to switch tracks?
- 22:52:08 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: no strict expectation. idea is transition should make our lives easier.
- 22:52:35 [tidoust]
- q- jernoble
- 22:52:38 [tidoust]
- ack MattWolenetz
- 22:52:38 [Zakim]
- MattWolenetz, you wanted to ask about registry and patent policies for externally referenced items (codecs, formats, etc) and to ask also about "and must not contain any
- 22:52:41 [Zakim]
- ... requirements on implementations." and to ask further about provision of registry data (required in the report or section) -- these are currently distinct notes, e.g. MSE
- 22:52:41 [Zakim]
- ... ISOBMFF vs MSE WebM etc.
- 22:52:42 [chcunningham]
- wolenetz: a few questions
- 22:52:58 [chcunningham]
- ... 1. what are the patent requirements for new registry vs current notes?
- 22:53:23 [chcunningham]
- ... I read that the new registry documents are still non normative
- 22:53:59 [chcunningham]
- ... 2. confused about how registry avoids imposing requirements on implementations
- 22:54:51 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: re: 1, registries have no impact on patent policy
- 22:55:23 [chcunningham]
- ... re: 2, I don't see any requirements in MSE registry. is there one?
- 22:56:09 [chcunningham]
- ... idea is that registry document itself should not have any normative requirements
- 22:56:40 [chcunningham]
- wolenetz: we see registry mentions requirements for registration entries. is that a requirement
- 22:56:54 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: no. that's not a requirement on implementation, just on registration
- 22:58:17 [chcunningham]
- wolenetz: registrations are currently in separate documents (e.g. webm byte stream). is this ok w/ new process?
- 22:58:29 [MattWolenetz]
- q-
- 22:58:42 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: yes, no need to change those documents. the new process is mostly about the registry table and adding things to registry
- 22:59:33 [chcunningham]
- cpn: is there any additional work to publish things that are already published?
- 23:00:02 [chcunningham]
- tidoust: good point. suggest that we start w/ WebCodecs since we haven't published that one yet.
- 23:00:27 [cpn]
- chcunningham: I don't object, but haven't looked at it closely
- 23:01:18 [cpn]
- ... I expect to be ready to run the CfC later this week
- 23:02:12 [chcunningham]
- cpn: wrapping up, next call is on 14th of December
- 23:02:17 [chcunningham]
- ... thanks!
- 23:02:46 [cpn]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 23:02:46 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/09-mediawg-minutes.html cpn
- 23:02:57 [cpn]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 23:04:51 [chcunningham_]
- chcunningham_ has joined #mediawg