W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > November 2010

Re: [media] WebSRT Sanitization (was RE: [minutes] Media sub-team teleconference: Oct. 27, 2010)

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 06:22:42 -0400
Message-ID: <4CD137F2.6040904@intertwingly.net>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Review and discuss is fine, but I will say that in my opinion bug 
reports are better.  Don't assume that what is in the bug report will be 
adopted 100%, and do assume that you can file additional bug reports. 
The best strategy is to iterate based on the actual content of the spec.

- Sam Ruby

On 11/03/2010 06:01 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> +1 to Paul's comments. I also think it's fine to review and discuss the proposed changes first.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
> On Nov 3, 2010, at 10:50 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>> I'd like to take some more time to review and discuss. Can the bug
>> reporting wait a little?
>> Thanks,
>> Silvia.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 8:40 PM, Paul Cotton<Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>  wrote:
>>>> Do we simply submit this as a continuation of the initial work request, or file a bug (or bugs?).
>>>
>>> Without speaking with my co-chairs, I would suggest you file one or more bugs and use the "proposed edits" as the requested changes.
>>>
>>> I am basing my advice on our previous direction on this item:
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Oct/0322.html
>>>
>>> "b) The work to make the these sections technology neutral is not complete.  Bug reports are encouraged in order to enable further progress."
>>>
>>> /paulc
>>>
>>> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
>>> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
>>> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: public-html-a11y-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-a11y-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of John Foliot
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 9:03 PM
>>> To: Sean Hayes; 'HTML Accessibility Task Force'
>>> Subject: [media] WebSRT Sanitization (was RE: [minutes] Media sub-team teleconference: Oct. 27, 2010)
>>> Importance: High
>>>
>>> Sean Hayes wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In fulfillment of my action item, attached are the proposed edits I
>>>> believe are required to make the current HTML5 technology neutral wrt
>>>> WebSRT.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sean,
>>>
>>> Thank you very much for this, it looks great. 2 questions for the group:
>>>
>>>         1) Does this look complete? Appears so to me, but we should have a quick verification/sanity check. Anyone else want to take a quick read through?
>>>
>>>         2) Thoughts about getting these edits done inside the Draft Spec.
>>> Janina, given that 2 of the chairs are with you in Lyon (and assuming you get this in time), perhaps you could ask for some guidance from them on a next step. Do we simply submit this as a continuation of the initial work request, or file a bug (or bugs?). Also, how can we get this to the head of the queue? It would be extremely useful to get the W3C Spec Text in line with our current position.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>> JF
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: public-html-a11y-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-a11y-
>>>> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of John Foliot
>>>> Sent: 28 October 2010 01:00
>>>> To: 'HTML Accessibility Task Force'
>>>> Subject: [minutes] Media sub-team teleconference: Oct. 27, 2010
>>>>
>>>> Please note that the minutes of today's teleconference can also be
>>>> found
>>>> at:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/10/27-html-a11y-minutes.html
>>>>
>>>> ***************************
>>>>
>>>> HTML-A11Y telecon
>>>> 27 Oct 2010
>>>>
>>>> See also: IRC log
>>>> Attendees
>>>> Present
>>>> Janina, Sean_Hayes, silvia, Judy, John_Foliot, Frank_Olivier Regrets
>>>> Chair Janina_Sajka Scribe John, John_Foliot, JF Contents Topics
>>>> Identify Scribe Actions Review Status Updates&  Brief Reports; User
>>>> Reqs; Spec Text Modifications; Technical Requirements Prioritizations
>>>> and Dependencies WCAG Mapping Must/Should/May Categorizations Summary
>>>> of Action Items
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <janina>  agenda: this
>>>> Identify Scribe
>>>>
>>>> <janina>  scribe: John
>>>>
>>>> <janina>  scribe: John_Foliot
>>>>
>>>> <JF>  scribe: JF
>>>>
>>>> <janina>  scribe: jf
>>>> Actions Review
>>>>
>>>> seems we have no more open action items effective today
>>>>
>>>> although this might be due to problems with the W3C systems
>>>>
>>>> systems tech guys have been dealing with larger system wide issues
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: this might not be affecting us, thinks we are actually in good
>>>> shape Status Updates&  Brief Reports; User Reqs; Spec Text
>>>> Modifications;
>>>>
>>>> Janina: reminder about W3C fishing attemps of late
>>>>
>>>> Judy: have checked the most recent TR draft, and that none of the
>>>> language we were concerned about is included
>>>>
>>>> we will be using bugzilla to get the text cleaned up
>>>>
>>>> to remove references to WebSRT from the Editor's Draft
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: happy with the framework, but we need to remove references to
>>>> WebSRT
>>>>
>>>> Judy: think it would be good to move quickly to get bugs filed
>>>>
>>>> propose language thta would replace existing text with neutral
>>>> language
>>>>
>>>> did we resolve who would be filing actual bugs last week? (seems no)
>>>>
>>>> Judy will then seek to have those bugs acted upon quickly
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: Eric was going to try and approach hixie about removing the
>>>> text himself and make it more neutral
>>>>
>>>> Not sure if hixie would be open to that
>>>>
>>>> Sean: prepared to work on this, but unsure on how to proceed
>>>>
>>>> Judy: would be good if we could offer proposed text
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: I would go through the draft, find mentions of WebSRT, and see
>>>> if it can be reformulated/rewritten with more neutral language
>>>>
>>>> submit those proposals to the mailing list, and then submit as
>>>> proposed changes
>>>>
>>>> Issue with no existing W3c Editor's Draft
>>>>
>>>> Sean: I can work on this perhaps next Monday
>>>>
>>>> Judy looking to see if we can access a W3C Editor Draft
>>>>
>>>> Janina: agree that we should work this via the list
>>>>
>>>> mindful that some will be at TPAC, but likely most will not.
>>>>
>>>> Judy: won't be available next week
>>>>
>>>> <judy_>  (...at least at the regular time)
>>>>
>>>> Janina: there might be some 'unconference' meeting @ TPAC ... probably
>>>> will be able to avail teleconference connectivity
>>>>
>>>> watch IRC and lists Thrusday and Friday
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: if the times can be posted, we could join in then
>>>>
>>>> Janina: so we won't have a call next week, but rather try and work
>>>> around TPAC scheduling Technical Requirements Prioritizations and
>>>> Dependencies
>>>>
>>>> meanwhile Sean can start on proposed edits and we can discuss via
>>>> email list
>>>>
>>>> Janina: this is kind of a meta-topic
>>>> WCAG Mapping
>>>>
>>>> Janina: have the mappings against WCAG complete?
>>>> Must/Should/May Categorizations
>>>>
>>>> JF - believes both WCAG and UAAG mappings are complete
>>>>
>>>> Janina: finished with her pass - essentially comfortable that we have
>>>> it right
>>>>
>>>> JF: did janina make any changes?
>>>>
>>>> Janina: silvia made them for Janina
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: most of them, but not everything
>>>>
>>>> there is a bit of issue on a few points, and we can keep the list
>>>> fairly dynamic and flexible
>>>>
>>>> however generally quite happy with the technical mappings
>>>>
>>>> only technologies that have cue format need to be checked when
>>>> evaluating time-text formats
>>>>
>>>> Silvia now considering whether to make a separate document for WebSRT
>>>> or adding a new column on the existing TTML evaluation page
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: if WG decides that this is an "official" W3C requirements what
>>>> happens to it after that
>>>>
>>>> Frank: do we have a plan for prioritization of requirements?
>>>>
>>>> Janina: this matrix was supposed to be able to help us get towards
>>>> this type of clarrity
>>>>
>>>> Frank: concerned that some of these things will take a longer time to
>>>> figure out ... one of MS goals is to allow 3rd parties to extend the
>>>> browser by installing additions ... would love to see a list of core
>>>> rquirements
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: 2 things that need to be done (for multi-track issue)
>>>>
>>>> how do we associate secondary files to the main file's timeline
>>>>
>>>> (needs HTML markup)
>>>>
>>>> we also need to define a JavaScript API to handle this scenario as
>>>> well
>>>>
>>>> however it should be fairly simple, as it will be based on the
>>>> existing JS API we have
>>>>
>>>> it just needs to define what type of language formats, and how to turn
>>>> on and off
>>>>
>>>> Judy: concerned about assuming that some things can't get into HTML5
>>>>
>>>> this becomes a tricky discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: once multi-track sync is figured out, the next big challenge
>>>> will likely be navigation by hierarchy
>>>>
>>>> suspect that this will take a number of years to achieve
>>>>
>>>> Judy: there is a commitment from the W3c to ensure that accessibility
>>>> is included in the HTML5 and done right
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: just want to be realistic that between 0% and 100% there is
>>>> multiple points
>>>>
>>>> Janina: wants to point out that the hierarchical navigation is
>>>> critical, and will need to be addressed
>>>>
>>>> <janina>
>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Oct/0520.html
>>>>
>>>> Silvia: would like to see us start engaging on the multi-track piece
>>>> that she started the discussion on last week.
>>>>
>>>> <silvia>  http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Sub-Group#Bugs
>>>>
>>>> JF to also go through bugzilla and ensure that all bugs are being
>>>> watch by us that affect us
>>>>
>>>> Janina: recap - Sean and Silvia (and perhaps Eric) to file bugs to
>>>> tweak language in Editors draft
>>>>
>>>> <scribe>  ACTION: Sean and Silvia (and perhaps Eric) to file bugs to
>>>> tweak language in Editors draft [recorded in
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/10/27-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
>>>>
>>>> <trackbot>  Created ACTION-67 - And Silvia (and perhaps Eric) to file
>>>> bugs to tweak language in Editors draft [on Sean Hayes - due 2010-11-
>>>> 03].
>>>>
>>>> <scribe>  ACTION: John to ensure all relevant bugs are added to the
>>>> wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/27-html-a11y-
>>>> minutes.html#action02]
>>>>
>>>> <trackbot>  Created ACTION-68 - Ensure all relevant bugs are added to
>>>> the wiki [on John Foliot - due 2010-11-03].
>>>>
>>>> <scribe>  ACTION: Silvia to work up checklist table for WebSRT
>>>> [recorded in
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/10/27-html-a11y-minutes.html#action03]
>>>>
>>>> <trackbot>  Created ACTION-69 - Work up checklist table for WebSRT [on
>>>> Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2010-11-03].
>>>>
>>>> Janina: thanks everyone. we are making very good progress Summary of
>>>> Action Items [NEW] ACTION: John to ensure all relevant bugs are added
>>>> to the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/27-html-a11y-
>>>> minutes.html#action02]
>>>> [NEW] ACTION: Sean and Silvia (and perhaps Eric) to file bugs to tweak
>>>> language in Editors draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/27-
>>>> html-a11y-minutes.html#action01] [NEW] ACTION: Silvia to work up
>>>> checklist table for WebSRT [recorded in
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/10/27-html-a11y-minutes.html#action03]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2010 10:23:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:23 GMT