W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > October 2014

Re: ACTION-341: Check with the mpeg folk if a wg note would be acceptable.

From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 09:32:57 +0000
To: Michael Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com>, "'Timed Text Working Group'" <public-tt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D06FD8C9.15217%nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
When I wrote "the mpeg folk" that was short-hand for "the mpeg folk in
this working group", not all of MPEG. The other thread you mention was the
result of my doing this action.

Summary of conclusions from that thread:

* We should re-register the media type with IANA, based on some syntax
that we publish somewhere.
* We do not have consensus to record the syntax and new media registration
in the TTML2 spec.
* We do not have consensus to record the syntax and new media registration
in a new WG Note.

Without consensus on where to specify the parameter syntax definition and
the media registration we can not proceed.

I believe the four logical possibilities for where to record the syntax
and new registration are (before discounting any if they're not
acceptable):

1. In TTML2
2. As a new WG Note.
3. As an erratum to TTML1.
4. As a new Recommendation (which would need to be added to the Charter as
a group deliverable).

To establish if we have a consensus for any of these options now please
could you respond with a numerical vote for each option, from the scale -1
to +1 where:

  -1 = formal objection
   0 = no objection
  +1 = strong preference

Fractional values can be used to indicate preference levels but only -1
will be considered an objection, i.e. -0.9 is a strong preference against,
but something that you could live with.

Nigel


On 24/10/2014 10:19, "Michael Dolan" <mdolan@newtbt.com> wrote:

>+1
>
>In addition, based on the other thread, there does not seem to be
>consensus
>to do this via a WG Note anyway. Let's resolve that before we start asking
>input from external bodies.
>
>	Mike
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Singer [mailto:singer@apple.com]
>Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 1:41 AM
>To: Timed Text Working Group
>Subject: Re: ACTION-341: Check with the mpeg folk if a wg note would be
>acceptable.
>
>Um, where the TTWG defines it MIME sub-parameters is entirely up to the
>TTWG.  At MPEG, we're merely going to say "the mime type of the included
>resource, possibly with sub-parameters as defiend for it, goes here"
>
>
>On Oct 23, 2014, at 16:55 , Timed Text Working Group Issue Tracker
><sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> ACTION-341: Check with the mpeg folk if a wg note would be acceptable.
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/341

>> 
>> Assigned to: Nigel Megitt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>David Singer
>Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 24 October 2014 09:33:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:18 UTC