16:42:15 RRSAgent has joined #mediawg 16:42:19 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/02/14-mediawg-irc 16:45:53 tidoust_ has joined #mediawg 16:46:01 Zakim has joined #mediawg 16:47:26 cpn has joined #mediawg 16:51:44 Meeting: Media WG meeting 16:51:54 Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/media-wg/blob/main/meetings/2023-02-14-Media_Working_Group_Teleconference-agenda.md 16:52:11 alwu has joined #mediawg 16:53:57 tidoust has joined #mediawg 16:56:30 RRSAgent, draft minutes 16:56:31 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/02/14-mediawg-minutes.html tidoust 16:56:52 RRSAgent, make logs public 16:56:59 scribenick: cpn 16:57:22 #me tidoust, have you started the webex? 16:57:37 s/#me tidoust, have you started the webex?// 16:59:11 present+ Chris_Needham, Youenn_Fablet, Alastor_Wu, Bernard_Aboba, Francois_Daoust 17:00:16 present+ Sushanth_Rajasankar 17:00:44 present+ Mark_Watson 17:01:34 present+ Jer_Noble, Frank_Liberato 17:02:00 jernoble has joined #mediawg 17:02:21 present+ Greg_Freedman 17:02:36 present+ Dale_Curtis 17:02:50 present+ Eric_Carlson 17:02:59 present+ Gary_Katsevman 17:03:39 ericc has joined #mediawg 17:03:49 dalecurtis has joined #mediawg 17:03:57 youenn_ has joined #mediawg 17:03:59 gregfreedman has joined #mediawg 17:04:00 liberato has joined #mediawg 17:04:05 markw_ has joined #mediawg 17:04:31 Topic: Welcome and AOB 17:05:05 present+ Joey_Parrish 17:05:12 scribe+ tidoust 17:05:40 cpn: Main item today is to talk about re-chartering. Group is chartered on a 2-year basis. Time to review the scope and milestones. 17:05:52 ... Any technical issue that we should also look at? 17:06:22 dalecurtis: An issue on WebCodecs, fine if we don't get to it this time. 17:07:10 Topic: Media WG rechartering 17:07:19 cpn: Current charter is set to expire at the end of May. 17:07:34 https://www.w3.org/2021/07/media-wg-charter.html 17:08:09 ... A number of questions are outlined in the agenda. 17:08:40 ... Starting with issue #22 to look at milestones and understand where we are. 17:08:49 -> https://github.com/w3c/media-wg/issues/22 Review group milestones 17:09:01 cpn: Goal is to review deliverables in turn. 17:09:44 ... Starting with Media Capabilties, we are perhaps looking for someone who can join as editor. 17:10:24 dalecurtis: Will departed Google. Johannes who worked on WebRTC might be interested. I'll get back to you. 17:11:10 cpn: I'm wondering how far away we are from moving the spec from drafts to candidate recommendation status. That means that we have some tests in place and interoperability demonstrated. 17:11:42 bernard: I don't think we're far from it. The functionality is pretty much done, some tests may be needed. 17:12:13 cpn: I'm really looking at milestones estimates in the charter. Some rough estimation of where we will be in the next chartering period. 17:12:38 ... CR in second half of this year for instance? And then Recommendation status mid next year? Is that reasonable? 17:13:21 bernard: I note that you don't have to dump all requirements to move to CR. They can be addressed later on. 17:14:01 dalecurtis: There's still some questions to answer on Media Capabilities integration with WebCodecs. We can probably answer these questions in the timeline you suggested, and then it depends on what we decide. 17:14:24 cpn: For the purpose of rechartering, that's as deep as we need to go. 17:14:39 ... Picture-in-Picture, we have an issue open to track progress to CR. 17:15:47 Frank: I can check with Francois (Beaufort) and report to the group on what may still be blocking. 17:16:06 cpn: OK, similar kind of timescale. 17:16:13 ... Media Session. 17:16:44 Youenn: Some parts are more mature. Camera and microphones are less mature. If we want to go fast, we could go with more mature features. 17:16:54 ... The WebRTC bits may be more time consuming. 17:17:11 ... If we want to split the work, we can move to Candidate Recommendation pretty quickly. 17:18:01 tidoust: We used to be stricter on CR, so once published a CR you can publish other drafts in the meantime 17:18:29 ... you can change the scope later, so OK to start with initial features and add others later on, both ways would work 17:19:10 youenn: Maybe we should schedule a quick discussion with Tommy, and see where we want to go. 17:19:51 cpn: In terms of timescale, it's probably slightly longer than the first two deliverables, given that some features are still further along. 17:19:58 ... Next on the list is Autoplay Policy Detection. 17:20:19 ... We've just gone through the First Public Working Draft, and completed horizontal reviews. 17:20:37 alwu: We filled horizontal reviews, still expecting some of them. 17:20:44 ... TAG review is done. 17:20:56 cpn: In terms of implementation timeline, what do you expect? 17:21:30 alwu: Current plan in Firefox is to release in next version 112. I also saw positive feedback from Apple. I don't know about others. 17:22:30 cpn: Perhaps a similar timeline as Media Session. 17:22:48 cpn: Next one is Media Source Extensions (MSE). 17:23:10 ... We have an updated draft. Some work in progress with regards to worker support. Not sure it fully landed. 17:23:27 ... Question is: are there changes that we might want to see in scope for the next charter period? 17:24:51 markw: I cannot tell whether there are things that still need to integrated relative worker support. I'm happy to help but cannot take sole editing role on the spec though. 17:25:31 dalecurtis: Matt left. My understanding is that there is not much that remained on ongoing features. One open question was around a stricter MSE for use in embedded devices perhaps. 17:25:39 cpn: I'd like to see progress there. 17:25:48 markw: Do you know whether there is a PR for that? 17:25:57 dalecurtis: I don't think there is one yet. 17:26:15 cpn: In terms of editing, if Matt is not able to continue, do you have thoughts of who could step in? 17:26:23 dalecurtis: Not at this stage. 17:26:35 cpn: The other thing that we talked about was integration with WebCodecs. 17:26:56 dalecurtis: We built a prototype in Chrome and no one used it, so we sort of abandoned that path for now. 17:27:05 cpn: We can probably leave it in the charter. 17:27:21 dalecurtis: I still think it's a good idea, but maybe we're not there yet. 17:27:44 cpn: Yes, it might be a post-v2 feature. We can be flexible on how we manage that. 17:28:14 ... It makes the timeline discussion a bit more tricky to answer. 17:29:00 dalecurtis: I'm happy to find time to help Mark sorting issues out. 17:29:29 markw: There is only one PR opened, related to WebCodecs. Question would be: are there issues that would require specification work. 17:29:44 ... I haven't been following the issues closely for a while. 17:29:54 ... It may be worth doing another pass through them. 17:30:11 ... 30 issues labeled as v2 issues. 17:30:22 cpn: We can do that separately from this call. 17:31:41 markw: We could estimate remaining spec work to better evaluate whether we need another editor recrue. 17:32:13 cpn: OK, we may organize a separate call then. 17:32:28 cpn: Moving on to Encrypted Media Extensions (EME). 17:32:36 ... I emailed editors this morning to suggest an update. 17:33:04 ... When we met at TPAC, we suggested we would aim at publishing a FPWD with the main updates. We're coming to the end of the charter period. 17:33:23 ... Is doing something fairly soon feasible for everybody? 17:34:17 ... The concern with the EME spec is that it has been in our charter since the creation of the Media WG but we've never published the spec, so Advisory Committee may look into this and wonder why the spec is still in our list of deliverables. 17:34:42 joey: It's been my intent to get something done but my availability has been low. 17:35:25 gregfreedman: I can do HDCP detection in the next few weeks. Can we do the easy part and work on the API to discover existing sessions? 17:35:45 joey: I'm willing to drop that. I don't think that's critical. 17:36:03 ... That was useful but no concrete agreement and can do without it. 17:36:35 cpn: FPWD triggers a call for patent exclusion, so ideally features we want in should be in already. 17:36:54 ... But if there's overall consensus that we can drop that feature. 17:37:13 joey: The feature has not been implemented, and I don't know of any concrete plan to have it implemented. 17:37:54 cpn: The charter expires end of May. I we can get a FPWD published by then, that would send the right signal. 17:38:08 ... Otherwise, we'll have to say FPWD will be published Q2 or Q3. 17:38:13 joey: I agree. 17:38:18 gregfreedman: I agree as well. 17:38:27 cpn: Happy to organize meetings as needed! 17:38:53 cpn: Moving on to WebCodecs 17:39:14 ... A lot of activity. Main spec, a set of registries. What do we think in terms of timescale? 17:39:40 ... Chromium is furthest ahead in terms of implementation. 17:40:03 ... It would be good to know about other plans. It feels to me as longer timescale. 17:40:06 q+ 17:40:56 Youenn: Form WPT side, WebCodecs video is the interop scope this year. Broader interop next year. Nothing we can share from an implementation perspective. 17:41:51 tidoust: I note that you mentioned having implementation plans before going to CR, CR in theory is a call for implementation, but nothing prevents moving forward without that, so long as agreement on the scope 17:41:55 q- 17:42:50 ... publishing as CR triggers horizontal review and call for patent exclusion, so useful for determining scope 17:43:13 cpn: and the PR stage is where the interoperability step comes in 17:43:38 bernard: I find it useful to label issues as CR-blocking. 17:43:52 ... That gives you a good list of priority and estimation of work that remains. 17:44:07 cpn: That may be something we could do in a future call, indeed. 17:45:04 jernoble has joined #mediawg 17:45:06 cpn: Audio Focus is our newest spec. In the current charter, it's listed as potential normative deliverable. In the new one, it will be a proper deliverable. 17:45:18 ... There was some discussion on naming, I'd like to review that now. 17:45:32 ... Youenn suggested to rename into "Audio Session". 17:45:48 ... I didn't hear strong concerns regarding that name. 17:46:25 tommy: personally, I'm confortable with Audio Session. 17:46:42 cpn: OK, that sounds good. 17:46:52 ... Time to FPWD: later this year. 17:48:08 youenn: We discussed with Alastor already about the explainer. It would be good to get feedback on it from Google as well. 17:48:14 tommy: I'll take a look. 18:00:51 cpn has joined #mediawg 18:04:04 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:04:05 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/02/14-mediawg-minutes.html cpn 18:07:13 scribe+ cpn 18:07:52 cpn: Next is Media Playback Quality. We've agreed to integrate into HTML, but needs someone to pick up the editorial work 18:08:24 tidoust: WHATWG would also need to see tests, and we may not yet have good test coverage in WPT 18:08:58 cpn: Don't need to decide who does it now, but we'll leave it in the charter until the work is done 18:09:03 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:09:04 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/02/14-mediawg-minutes.html cpn 18:10:49 cpn: Finally DataCue and Sourcing In band Media Resource Tracks specs. Should we leave these in scope as potential deliverables, is there implementer interest for DataCue? 18:11:24 ericc: We're interested in DataCue, yes. Sourcing In band tracks is not so useful 18:11:41 cpn: DataCue is in WICG, we welcome help and effort to move that along 18:12:45 ... Sourcing In band tracks, it's referenced from HTML but has things never implemented, so could use tidying up 18:13:50 ... But nobody is really pushing to update it, so propose we don't include it in the charter. There was a CG that created it, no longer active. Anyone who does want to work on it is welcome to do that in future 18:14:28 Topic: WebCodecs #270 Support per-frame QP configuration by VideoEncoder 18:14:55 dale: I wanted to flag this issue for offline discussion: https://github.com/w3c/webcodecs/issues/270 18:19:07 cpn: so it could go in the main WebCodecs spec, for all codecs, and interpretation depends on the codec-specific registration, or could be specced independently for each codec 18:19:12 bernard: [missed comment related to how this relates to encoding optimisation when background blurring is in use] 18:19:47 markw: All modern codecs use quantisation, so might have a parameter, but its meaning might vary, or in future there might be multiple parameters, so would want to design to be future proof 18:19:54 dale: We have VBR and CQ modes where it's automatically adjusted 18:19:59 ... No need to conclude here, please weigh in offline 18:20:04 [adjourned] 18:20:12 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:20:13 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/02/14-mediawg-minutes.html cpn 20:05:43 Zakim has left #mediawg