Mozilla comments on Web Platform and Timed Media

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Mozilla comments on Web Platform and Timed Media

L. David Baron
Putting on the record that these comments are public by forwarding
to www-archive.

-David

--
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                          https://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
             Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
             What I was walling in or walling out,
             And to whom I was like to give offense.
               - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)

The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'Call for Review:
Timed Media Working Group' (Advisory Committee) for Mozilla Foundation by
David Baron.


The reviewer's organization suggests changes to this Charter, but supports
the proposal whether or not the changes are adopted.

Additional comments about the proposal:
   One of the major problems in reaching interoperability for media
standards has been patent licensing of lower-level standards covering
many lower-level media technologies.  The W3C's Patent Policy only helps
with technology that the W3C develops, and not technology that it
references.  Given that, this group's charter should explicitly prefer
referencing technology that can be implemented and used without paying
royalties and without negotiating contracts for things for which
licenses are not available to all.  Likewise, the charter should list as
a success criterion that the technology produced by the working group
can be implemented and used without paying royalties and without
negotiating contracts for things for which licenses are not available to
all.


Having the media group be separate from the HTML / Web Platform working
group is also worse in terms of commitments made under the patent
policy, and we would prefer keeping the media work as a task force
within a larger group, as it is today.



The reviewer's organization intends to participate in these groups:
   - Timed Media Working Group

The reviewer's organization:
   - intends to review drafts as they are published and send comments.
   - intends to develop experimental implementations and send experience
reports.
   - intends to develop products based on this work.
   - intends to apply this technology in our operations.

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/timed-media-2015/ until 2015-09-10.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer

The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'Call for Review:
Web Platform Working Group' (Advisory Committee) for Mozilla Foundation by
David Baron.


The reviewer's organization suggests changes to this Charter, and only
supports the proposal if the changes are adopted [Formal Objection].

Additional comments about the proposal:
   We are very concerned that the merger of HTML work into the functional
WebApps group might harm the ability of the work happening in WebApps to
continue to make progress as well as it currently does.  While a number
of people within Mozilla think we should formally object to this merger
because of the risk to work within WebApps, I am not making this a
formal objection.  However, I think the proper functioning of this group
needs to be carefully monitored, and the consortium needs to be prepared
to make changes quickly if problems occur.  And I think it would be
helpful if the HTML and WebApps mailing lists are *not* merged.


A charter that is working on many documents that are primarily developed
at the WHATWG should explicitly mention the WHATWG.  It should explain
how the relationship works, including satisfactorily explaining how
W3C's work on specifications that are rapidly evolving at the WHATWG
will not harm interoperability (presuming that the W3C work isn't just
completely ignored).

In particular, this concerns the following items of chartered work:
  * Quota Management API
  * Web Storage (2nd Edition)
  * DOM4
  * HTML
  * HTML Canvas 2D Context
  * Web Sockets API
  * XHR Level 1
  * Fetching resources
  * Streams API
  * URL
  * Web Workers
and the following items in the specification maintenance section:
  * CORS
  * DOM specifications
  * HTML 5.0
  * Progress Events
  * Server-sent Events
  * Web Storage
  * Web Messaging

One possible approach to this problem would be to duplicate the
technical work happening elsewhere on fewer or none of these
specifications.  However, given that I don't expect that to happen, the
charter still needs to explain the relationship between the technical
work happening at the WHATWG and the technical work (if any) happening
at the W3C.


The group should not be chartered to modularize the entire HTML
specification.  While specific documents that have value in being
separated, active editorship, and implementation interest are worth
separating, chartering a group to do full modularization of the HTML
specification feels both like busywork and like chartering work that is
too speculative and not properly incubated.  It also seems like it will
be harmful to interoperability since it proposes to modularize a
specification whose primary source is maintained elsewhere, at the
WHATWG.


The charter should not include work on HTML Imports.  We don't plan to
implement it for the reasons described in
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/12/mozilla-and-web-components/
and believe that it will no longer be needed when JavaScript modules are
available.


The inclusion of "Robust Anchoring API" in the charter is suspicious
given that we haven't heard of it before.  It should probably be in an
incubation process before being a chartered work item.


We also don't think the working group should be chartered to work
on any items related to "Widgets"; this technology is no longer used.


The only part of this response that constitutes a formal objection is
having a reasonable explanation of the relationship between the working
group and the work happening at the WHATWG (rather than nearly ignoring
the existence of the WHATWG).  However, many of the other issues issues
raised are serious concerns and we hope they will be properly
considered.



The reviewer's organization intends to participate in these groups:
   - Web Platform Working Group

The reviewer's organization:
   - intends to review drafts as they are published and send comments.
   - intends to develop experimental implementations and send experience
reports.
   - intends to develop products based on this work.
   - intends to apply this technology in our operations.

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/webplatformwg-2015/ until 2015-09-10.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment