W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > January 2012

RE: TTML after March

From: Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:37:12 +0000
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, public-tt <public-tt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E9A92BD0A4FC934EB7935470A46D152408FC1729@DB3EX14MBXC324.europe.corp.microsoft.com>
>From a Microsoft's perspective the position is that yes the working group should be re-chartered, and we are currently preparing a more detailed response as to what specific work items need to be dealt with.

As current chair of the group, I would like to convene an conference call, say a weeks or so from today, to discuss this issue and begin to frame what a new charter should contain. Phillipe, if you could organise the logistics of the call that would be very helpful.

I'd like this to be an open meeting and not closed to current WG members, so that anyone that is working on TTML, or a derivative, gets a chance to have their say. In particular I would like to invite representatives from organisations, such as SMPTE and the EBU to discuss what their needs are.

I will prepare an agenda of topics, so if you have something you think should be discussed, let me know and I'll try and organise time for it.

Thanks,

Sean Hayes
TTWG Chair
________________________________________
From: Philippe Le Hegaret [plh@w3.org]
Sent: 11 January 2012 9:40 PM
To: public-tt
Subject: TTML after March

The charter of the TTML Working Group will expire at the end of March
2012 [1] (it was extended for one year in 2011). I'm curious about the
thoughts from individuals here about what to do, if anything, beyond the
end of March.

For example, SMPTE did some extensions to SMPTE-TT back in 2010. Should
we look at those and fold them back in the specification?

Dynamic flow was removed from the specification due to lack of
implementation experience. Should it be reconsidered?

Should we switch from XSL FO to CSS?

Should we do a profile of TTML as well and retaining features that are
the most deployed?

Or should the group just declare victory and go home?

Thank you,

Philippe

[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/timed-text-wg.html
[2]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/CR-ttaf1-dfxp-20100223/#style-attribute-dynamicFlow

PS: if someone wants to ask the Timed Text Community Group for feedback
on this matter as well, feel free to forward this message. Input is
welcome!




Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 16:38:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 24 January 2012 16:38:35 GMT