W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > March 2017

Re: {minutes} TTWG Meeting 2017-03-02

From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 12:45:50 -0800
Message-ID: <CAF_7JxD0zDHKgZG+F-subx130mgp4J20EnpYus_NgFFiYonL5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
>  consensus to clarify in IMSC 1 that TTML1 permits foreign namespace elements only in tt:metadata and attributes everywhere, §6.2 of IMSC1.

Please see PR at https://github.com/w3c/imsc/pull/216

Best,

-- Pierre

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
> Thanks all for attending today's slightly curtailed meeting (and for being
> prompt at the beginning).
>
> Minutes can be found in HTML format at
> https://www.w3.org/2017/03/02-tt-minutes.html
>
> Please note that we will be extending the remaining meetings in March to 2
> hours and beginning them at 10am Boston time. Also please check your diaries
> because DST comes into operation in March, earlier in the US than in Europe.
>
> Those minutes in text format:
>
>    [1]W3C
>
>       [1] http://www.w3.org/
>
>                 Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
>
> 02 Mar 2017
>
>    See also: [2]IRC log
>
>       [2] http://www.w3.org/2017/03/02-tt-irc
>
> Attendees
>
>    Present
>           Dae, Glenn, Nigel, Pierre, Thierry, Andreas, Mike
>
>    Regrets
>           None
>
>    Chair
>           Nigel
>
>    Scribe
>           Nigel
>
> Contents
>
>      * [3]Topics
>          1. [4]This Meeting
>          2. [5]Meetings times
>          3. [6]IMSC
>          4. [7]TTML
>      * [8]Summary of Action Items
>      * [9]Summary of Resolutions
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>    <scribe> Scribe: Nigel
>
> This Meeting
>
>    Nigel: Today, we have a proposal on meeting times, one IMSC
>    issue and some TTML issues.
>    ... Any other topics to cover?
>
>    Andreas: I'd like to cover the pull request on TTML1.
>
> Meetings times
>
>    Dae: I think there's enough to talk about between now and the
>    end of the month I propose
>    ... to start "early", at 10am Boston time, so we can have
>    longer meetings.
>
>    Nigel: By the way, DST comes in, in the US, soon, and at the
>    end of March in Europe.
>
>    Thierry: I believe it is on the 12th in the US and the 26th in
>    Europe.
>    ... So there is an impact in Europe, but we are back in sync
>    after March 12th.
>
>    Nigel: Dae, I think this is a good suggestion.
>
>    Andreas: It's fine for me to start an hour earlier but I cannot
>    allocate 2 hours to the meeting, however this is not a problem
>    if you go ahead.
>
>    Nigel: Okay as Chair I'm going to make the call and say we will
>    do this, begin at 10am Boston and set a duration of 2 hours for
>    all the remaining meetings in March.
>
> IMSC
>
>    [10]foreign namespace usage is underspecified
>
>      [10] https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/213
>
>    Mike: Regarding the example of smpte:information my view is
>    that it is an error in the
>    ... SMPTE-TT spec, and it should say "descendant" of the head
>    element, with the intent that
>    ... it be made a child of the `metadata` element under `head`.
>
>    Glenn: The reason we put `metadata` everywhere was to support
>    the addition of foreign
>    ... namespace data, with the exception of the `tt` element on
>    the basis that such metadata
>    ... could be placed under `head/metadata`.
>    ... It is a bit indirect but if you follow through TTML1 from
>    §3 to §4 to §5 the foreign
>    ... namespace elements _are_ pruned because their names are not
>    present in the abstract
>    ... document type.
>
>    Nigel: That's an argument contrary to my reading, but I can
>    accept that.
>
>    Andreas: That matches my understanding too.
>
>    group: [seems to have consensus that foreign namespace elements
>    are prohibited in TTML1 except as children of metadata]
>
>    Nigel: My concern for the concrete encoding in IMSC1 is that we
>    may prohibit the addition
>    ... of vocabulary that is orthogonal to processing defined in
>    TTML and IMSC and that may
>    ... prevent some useful use cases.
>
>    Mike: It seems like an arbitrary syntactical restriction since
>    foreign namespace attributes
>    ... are allowed - why allow attributes but not elements?
>
>    Glenn: That was a deliberate choice to avoid putting TTML
>    namespace elements as children
>    ... of foreign namespace elements.
>    ... A clarification may be useful in TTML1 and possibly a
>    normative statement in TTML2 would be advisable.
>
>    Nigel: Is everyone except me here comfortable with prohibiting
>    foreign namespace elements in IMSC1 but permitting foreign
>    namespace attributes?
>
>    Mike: I don't want to add further restrictions but I think that
>    is what TTML1 says today.
>    ... I want to be crystal clear in IMSC1, and then we can take
>    up the question in TTML1 and TTML2.
>
>    group: Consensus to clarify in IMSC 1 that TTML1 permits
>    foreign namespace elements only in tt:metadata and attributes
>    everywhere, §6.2 of IMSC1.
>
>    Pierre: There's already a note referring to structural elements
>    of TTML1, so it could be an
>    ... extension to that. We may want to go further, or stay
>    silent, I'm not sure which yet.
>
>    Nigel: Who will take this action?
>
>    Pierre: I will do this, and check in with Mike before posting
>    as a PR.
>
>    Mike: I'm relieved of the action from last week.
>
> TTML
>
>    Dae: If anyone is concerned that we cannot meet the TTML2 WR
>    deadline please raise any
>    ... issues that will block us from getting there.
>
>    Pierre: Movielabs' position is that all issues have to be
>    resolved before by WR, either by closing or deferring them.
>    ... So a priori it means every issue that has not been assigned
>    by consensus to TTML.next.
>
>    Dae: For example the issues raised by i18n review.
>
>    Pierre: I think anyone in the group can take a stab at
>    resolving those issues.
>    ... There are some that Movielabs has stronger opinions on but
>    in general it is not possible
>    ... to defer them en masse.
>
>    Nigel: The horizontal review comments should not be ignored but
>    we may be able to address
>    ... them after WR and before CR.
>
>    Pierre: I agree with that.
>
>    Nigel: I need to run now but the point is made Dae that we have
>    issues to cover.
>
>    Dae: We should focus on the ones that are not 'easy' first.
>
>    Glenn: I don't intend to address the HR comments before WR by
>    the way, so we need to
>    ... discuss what to do about those if there is not consensus on
>    that.
>
>    Nigel: Thanks everyone. [adjourns meeting]
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> Summary of Resolutions
>
>    [End of minutes]
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>
>     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [11]scribe.perl version
>     1.152 ([12]CVS log)
>     $Date: 2017/03/02 18:40:30 $
>
>      [11] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>      [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>
>
Received on Thursday, 2 March 2017 20:46:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:38 UTC