Meeting minutes
Welcome
cpn: Welcome, great to see you all for this first meeting of 2023.
… Too late for Happy New Year? HNY anyway!
… Agenda for today.
… What we're doing in this group.
… We're going through Rechartering, approaching the end of our 2 year Charter period.
… Looking ahead,
… what do we want to focus on?
… What is working well, what would we change? etc
… Before that, updates from the Media WG.
… Coincidentally also rechartering.
… There'll be a meeting on that next week, 14th Feb,
… with a similar exercise, looking at deliverables, status, timelines, scope.
… The scope will change a bit.
… Most significant: there is a new Audio Focus API.
Media WG Updates
cpn: The Media WG has agreed to adopt as a deliverable, as a WIP standard.
… The goal of the Audio Focus API is to allow websites to
… declare and interact with the media playback engine in the system for audio,
… so that they can control how audio from a browser is mixed with audio from other applications
… on the system.
… For example, you're playing music and a tab wants to play a notification sound:
… How are those balanced? Does one stop temporarily awaiting completion of the other?
… Do they play at the same time as each other?
… Most relevant on desktop and mobile, not clear how it works in a TV environment.
… Work just getting started.
… Initial explainer linked in the slides here
cpn: Discussion around the naming - the API in the explainer uses "audio session" whereas
… the GitHub repo title is "audio focus" so they're inconsistent
… Maybe comes from the underlying native APIs - iOS has "AV session", Android "Audio Focus API" that
… does a similar job.
… The easiest thing is probably to align to "Audio Session API" but risks confusion with the
… "Media Session API" which does a different job to do with controlling playback.
… Please look, raise issues and questions.
<kaz> explainer.md
cpn: Next, again in Media WG.
… There was a liaison statement from ITU-T SG16
… They wanted to enquire about our plans for WebCodecs API and to tell us about H.266
… or "VVC" to see if there would be interest in adding a Web Codecs support via the registry of codecs,
<kaz> Media WG's reply to the Liaison statement from SG16
cpn: and the WG replied to say that in principle they would support adding the registration
… but there would need to be interest from the browser vendors to implement and expose it.
… If there are implementations of VVC support in browsers or through a compatible JS or WASM library
… that would be an acceptable route for adding the registration.
… I don't know what happens next, if they want to develop it.
… We haven't had any further dialog with the ITU-T group
… That was just to give an update on the recent changes in the WG.
… The Charter for the WG expires end of May this year.
… Expecting to go into rechartering with Audio Focus API as a deliverable,
… and updating the timelines for the other specifications.
… The main concern we have is with the EME spec, which was in charter,
… and haven't done any work on the spec itself.
… Not got to FPWD of EME v2.
… Something that if we can prioritise ahead of rechartering, would help.
… Otherwise the AC may have concern about chartering to do work that we're not doing,
… particularly given sensitivities about EME.
… Thoughts or questions?
group: [no thoughts or questions]
MEIG Rechartering
<kaz> Current Charter
cpn: The Charter period ends 31st April this year.
… We have a couple of options of what to do if we want to propose continuing as we are.
… We can prepare an updated draft and send for review, and to the AC.
… This raises questions about what we're actually doing here and what activities
… we want to focus on and prioritise.
… It's really helpful and good to have all of you here as participants.
… Do we need to widen participation to bring in other voices?
… I'm asking myself if having this as an IG, open to W3C members, is the right structure.
… Should we consider being a Community Group, open to other potential contributors who are not
… W3C members?
… More practically, we have had a pattern of running monthly meetings,
… and each one tries to focus on a particular topic.
… Speaking personally, I'm finding it harder to organise them because it is
… not always clear what we should be talking about.
… It is not always clear what the next steps should be.
… So I'm very much open to suggestions and your thoughts and feedback on all of this.
… Brief review of previous Charter period:
cpn: We had an activity looking at Media Production, organised a workshop, with Pierre very active
… in pulling that together.
… Didn't really translate into more of an ongoing piece of work.
… Should we refocus to do something with that?
… Media Timed Events activity and DataCue API, which we need to make decisions about.
… Has that run its useful course?
… Should the DataCue API itself be pursued?
… Although it's not really an IG thing, we've moved it into the Incubator Group.
… I'm uncertain about the level of support for standardising it.
… We had a meeting to introduce the content provenance work happening elsewhere.
… Again, no particular follow-up actions for us, interesting nevertheless.
… Collaboration with DASH-IF and WebRTC for low latency experience.
… Consumer electronics, with presentations about miniApps, lightning.js, and presentations from
… NHK and BBC about how they approach app development.
… And our CTA Wave collaboration.
cpn: Before that, previous Charter period:
… Looked at Media WG deliverables as well as WoT, Multicast, etc
… A way to think about previous activities to help us think about what to do next.
… Potential activies
cpn: Media Production: how do you follow up and make browser based video editing tools?
… All the different considerations of applying vision processing on content, the WebCodecs API,
… and how all the pieces fit together. Potentially an activity for us if there's participant interest.
… Most recently we've been looking at the CE/TV app development, where
… I am slightly uncertain as to specifically what we ought to do next.
… We started to collate all of the input received so far.
… Perhaps an exercise to identify any standards gaps, adoption gaps etc.
… For each item, what is the most useful next step?
… A number of media-related W3C groups: the IG as a hub for those is useful.
… Media WG, Timed Text WG, others.
… What should be our communications approach? How best to interact with them?
… Similar question around the media-related external SDOs.
… Would it be beneficial to us to have more direct, maybe joint, meetings with those groups I've listed.
… To share the potential collaborations or requirements that are currently unmet
… that would be useful to share.
Chris: Any thoughts or comments?
JohnRiv: On the topic of IG vs CG, if we wanted to have a CG instead, we'd want to talk to people who don't join because it's an IG
… They may not join the CG either. We should confirm that before going that route
Chris: For me, it's about defining what we want to work on an build some participation around those topics
<Zakim> nigel, you wanted to ask about W3C strategy and our role there
Nigel: One thing I've observed elsewhere in W3C is a renewed push to think about the strategy of W3C and what it works on
… With the new legal structure. Should it be explicitly in scope of this group to help guide strategy for media proposals?
… Could be reviewing proposed charters. Should we consider ourselves to do that?
Francois: This is basically how we present the IG usually, as a steering committee for media activities in W3C
… That's the theory, but in practice the IG hasn't really taken that role. But makes sense to have it in the charter
Nigel: I didn't check the Charter before I asked!
Francois: I didn't check before I answered!
cpn: There's something interesting there - we could push so that there's an expectation
… of our review.
kaz: I agree with Chris Needham's point.
… Even though W3C has changed the mechanism, we ourselves
… can think about what we want and expect ourselves first,
<tidoust> [Now looking at the charter, I see, for instance: "Suggesting to existing Working Groups that they include particular topics in their scope as appropriate" and "Tracking and review of media-related deliverables developed by other W3C groups, and reporting of issues as appropriate" in Success criteria]
kaz: and think about W3C's strategy separately.
… W3C is reorganising the industry work too.
… I can talk to PLH about the potential impact.
… As a starting point we should think about what we want first, as Chris Needham proposed.
… If by chance becoming a CG would be even more productive, we might want to think about that possibility.
… We need to think about who would join which kind of discussion, in what style.
… We still have a few more months - extension is possible as well.
… Let's start discussing our expectation.
Nigel: There's an important structural point about the IG vs CG discussion, related to W3C strategy.
… I'm not sure it's normal to have a strategy influencing group as a CG, so it has non member input
… These two questions about IG vs CG and strategy setting vs strategy observing are inter-related, but unsure how
cpn: John's point resonates with me. I'm thinking about how to bring more voices
… and if the membership requirement is a barrier to that, it's something to consider.
… If in practice it is not, then I see no reason particularly to change.
… One interesting thing is that at the last TPAC we had the meeting organised by Dolby
… where they have essentially organised a new CG, the Audio Video Formats CG,
… and that really was a way for them to get around their own IPR constraints or concerns.
… Essentially it's scoped like the IG is scoped - doesn't produce specifications, can
… only send work to WGs or create incubations, just like the IG,
… but it's a structure they were comfortable working under.
… That group has not really got started.
… I've been talking to them off-line to try to help them get started.
… There are things people want to do and talk about.
… I don't know specifically what they want to propose.
… For whatever reason the IG wasn't quite the right structure for them.
… It may be that over time Dolby will become a member and we can essentially merge everything back
… into one place, but that's perhaps a way off.
… To summarise, potentially picking up the browser based video editing is a possibility
… if there are a small number of people wanting to contribute.
Application Development for Consumer Products
cpn: Moving to Consumer Product Application development...
cpn: There's a link through to a document.
… The general question is: what's the most useful thing for us to do next?
… Is it that we are identifying gaps that need new standards?
… Is it around, as Chris has advocated in previous meetings, moving TV application development
… to a place where it is more like mobile app development in terms of the developer experience
… and the sets of technologies you can use?
… Is there something around testing and conformance for us to look at?
… With this my sense is that it would be helpful to have more input from app developers
… to see how they are seeing this and the issues that they're particularly seeing.
… Part of that is if we want to go to manufacturers to ask for some particular capabilities
… in the next generation of embedded browsers, then there's a consensus view of what that looks like
… coming from application developers.
cpn: The thing I've seen in WAVE most recently is around performance, which we've discussed too.
… I'm looking forward to seeing where they get to in terms of gathering input.
… That would be really useful for us to make performance related improvements.
… Figuring out what improvements we need across devices.
… I wrote this unofficial document to collate everything we've heard into one place.
… Notes from previous meetings - all different aspects.
… Given we've seen e.g. Amazon Prime adopting WASM for performance and control
… so there's less dependency on higher level browser features.
<kaz> Draft document to collect issues
cpn: Application launch, Device compatibility, etc: for each thing, what is actionable for us?
… Is it something we need to influence in terms of standardisation, or adoption?
… Does it need improved conformance testing?
… If there's interest amongst all of you then I'm happy that we have those conversations.
… I'd like to capture your input and views.
… Take each of these things, look at them a bit more closely: what more specifically should the outcome be?
… We've shared potential problem areas.
… What do we want to progress from those things?
JohnRiv: To talk to what we've discussed in WAVE in the last couple of months,
… we've been looking at performance.
Nigel: We've seen streaming providers move towards more native than web applications
… We have two surveys, one for CE manufacturers, one for app developers
… For manufacturers, is supporting these native apps an issue?
… For developers, is performance an issue?
… And for both groups, would a common web based platform be helpful?
… If so, what are your thoughts? We're planning to send a survey, this week. We're collecting contact names, so if you're interested, please let me know
… Want to make sure we're working towards the right long term goal, for the web on TV and embedded devices
Chris: We look forward to the outcome of that feedback
<JohnRiv> john_riviello@comcast.com - email me if you are interested in receiving the survey from WAVE
Chris: Does anyone think we shouldn't recharter?
… Timing for rechartering?
Kaz: We need AC review, that usually takes 1 month. If we get comments, it could take another month
… Technically we're in good timing for a simple rechartering :)
Francois: We also need to run internal horizontal reviews, which takes a bit longer
… Thank you for preparing the slides. Useful to see the list of things the group worked on
… I'm not worried about the "what", more about the "who" ... who can lead the tasks?
… Topics don't make much progress if people don't step up. Can we run a call in the group, to see who's willing to spend time on what
… We don't need to worry about removing things from the charter. But would be good to understand what the IG might achieve in the next charter period
Jad: I can give a new member's perspectives. One reason for joining this group, is looking at problems for media on the web
… We're still navigating the problem space, sounds like we're exploring
… I'm keen to be more involved over time. Look at how we build media rich experiences, and based on that come up with creative solutions
Kaz: It's good timing, to think about what and who. If needed, we can request an extension
<kaz> [adjourned]