W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > February 2018

{minutes} TTWG Meeting 2018-02-22

From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 16:26:16 +0000
To: "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D6B49B46.55BB1%nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Thanks for attending today's TTWG meeting. Minutes can be found in HTML format at https://www.w3.org/2018/02/22-tt-minutes.html

Please note that I recorded the agreement to transition TTML2 to CR, and also separately a resolution to set the CR exit date as early as the Process permits, since it is likely that the exit date will need to be modified prior to actual publication (it is too early at the moment):

RESOLUTION: The TTWG requests transition of TTML2 to Candidate Recommendation.
RESOLUTION: The earliest CR exit date will be 4 weeks after publication of the CR, i.e. the minimum permitted period.

In both these cases I will consider the review period under the group's Decision Policy to be Monday 5th March 2018, since they follow the call for consensus issued on Monday 19th February. (strictly, that call for consensus did not explicitly mention the CR exit date, but the document on which the call for consensus was based had a date of March 29, so I'm counting it as part of the original decision, and only made it an explicit separate resolution so that whoever needs to make the change knows they have permission to do so)

I will circulate details of the joint meeting with APA, to be held on Wednesday 28th February at 1700 UTC, when I have them.

The minutes in text format:


   [1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                Timed Text Working Group Teleconference

22 Feb 2018

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/png-hdr-pq/

Attendees

   Present
          Nigel, Cyril, Mike

   Regrets
          Thierry, Pierre

   Chair
          Nigel

   Scribe
          nigel

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]This meeting
         2. [5]TTML2 CR Transition
         3. [6]Joint meeting with APA next week.
         4. [7]IMSC 1.0.1 PR
         5. [8]SMPTE liaison
         6. [9]TTML1 3rd Ed CR
         7. [10]Meeting close.
     * [11]Summary of Action Items
     * [12]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <scribe> scribe: nigel

This meeting

   Nigel: Today, I want to note the TTML2 CR Transition
   resolution, plus IMSC 1.0.1 PR.
   ... I've noticed that we owe SMPTE a liaison, so I've drafted
   something for discussion and
   ... sent it to the member list.
   ... I'd like to check what we need to do for TTML1 Third Ed to
   get to CR too.
   ... There are a number of agenda issues on IMSC 1.1 which
   ideally I'd cover today.
   ... Any other business?

   group: [silence]

TTML2 CR Transition

   Nigel: As discussed during last week's call, there were a few
   final changes to make to TTML2
   ... to get to a state where I could request approval to
   transition to CR from the WG.
   ... I did that by email on Monday and mentioned that I'd record
   it as a resolution today.

   RESOLUTION: The TTWG requests transition of TTML2 to Candidate
   Recommendation.

   Nigel: That's now recorded, however the clock started on that
   as a decision on Monday, so
   ... the window for objections will close on Monday 5th March
   2018, which is 10 working days after when I sent the call for
   Consensus.
   ... One thing to note is that after sending that CfC we merged
   one non-substantive change,
   ... which was to list ipd as an at risk feature, which had
   previously been resolved but was
   ... accidentally omitted from the document.

   Cyril: We need to change the CR exit earliest date.

   Nigel: That's true, we do, thank you.
   ... I think we can leave that to staff or the webmaster, but
   have to agree the period.

   RESOLUTION: The earliest CR exit date will be 4 weeks after
   publication of the CR, i.e. the minimum permitted period.

   Nigel: Unfortunately Thierry is away until 12th March and he
   has the action to pull together
   ... the wide review comments, which as far as I can tell has
   not been done yet. Those are
   ... needed to support the transition to CR.
   ... We potentially could do it by pointing at GitHub issues -
   I'll check with plh if that
   ... can work.
   ... Alternatively anyone could pull the information together.

   Cyril: Potentially that could add another week or two to our
   publication time depending
   ... on how quickly Thierry can do it when he gets back.

   Nigel: True, I'll check with plh and get back to the group.

   Cyril: Can we talk about next steps?
   ... After CR, we have to prepare the test suite, implementation
   reports, pull requests for
   ... remaining editorial changes deferred to CR2.

   Nigel: Plus addressing any implementation feedback that could
   be substantive.

   Cyril: How do we organise the effort to produce the test suite?
   ... I proposed some time ago that people could provide tests
   for features they are interested in.

   Nigel: I think first we need to decide which repo to put the
   tests in, then raise an issue
   ... per feature, then handle the contributions as pull requests
   which we review as normal.

   Cyril: I think plh suggested at TPAC that we should use web
   platform tests, but we cannot
   ... do so with any javascript harness.

   Nigel: I think that puts them into the class called "ref
   tests".

   Cyril: The previous test suite lacked example images for the
   rendering. That caused some
   ... trouble for the community that was using it. I think we
   should put some effort into
   ... proposing example renderings for each test.

   Nigel: Yes. I'd go slightly further, which is to say we should
   provide example (correct) output.
   ... That's to cover validation tests, whose output is "good" or
   "error" or "warning" etc. as well
   ... as presentation tests.

   Cyril: In the implementation report we could include each
   implementation's actual output.

   Nigel: We don't normally do that, because it makes the report
   too big, and it isn't required.
   ... We can encourage implementers to share their output for our
   use though.

   Cyril: how many tests will it be?

   Nigel: Not sure, could be 100-200 individual tests, depending
   how we arrange them, and
   ... how many new feature designators there are.

   Cyril: I'll try to count them and do a first pass estimate.

Joint meeting with APA next week.

   Nigel: Reminder we have a joint meeting with APA to discuss
   accessibility issues with IMSC
   ... and WebVTT on Wednesday 28th February, 1700 UTC, details to
   follow.

IMSC 1.0.1 PR

   Nigel: The request to transition to PR has been approved by the
   Director, and I hope it will
   ... be published today.

   [13]IMSC 1.0.1 latest version

     [13] https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1.0.1/

   Nigel: Right now that shows a CR.

SMPTE liaison

   Nigel: I've just sent the member list a draft text of a liaison
   to send to SMPTE about
   ... TTML2 and IMSC 1.1. Can we please review now?

   [14]TTML2 image element

     [14] https://w3c.github.io/ttml2/index.html#embedded-content-vocabulary-image

   Mike: We should include a link to that in the message so they
   don't look at the pre-CR WD.

   Nigel: Good point

   Mike: With the URL to the ED in there, I think that looks good.

   Cyril: [makes a point about MIME type]

   Nigel: OK, I think I have enough to go ahead now, thanks both.

TTML1 3rd Ed CR

   Nigel: I wanted to check what work remains to publish TTML1 3rd
   Ed as a CR.
   ... The 3rd Ed CR milestone has 5 open issues, 1 with a pr
   open, so it looks like those need
   ... to be addressed.
   ... I'm unclear about the requirements for wide review for
   transitioning from TTML1 2nd Ed Rec to TTML1 3rd Ed CR.
   ... I'll check with staff on the transition requirements.
   ... I'll also check the differences against TTML1 2nd Ed to see
   if anything looks substantive.

   Mike: At least in the past the process was abbreviated for a
   new Edition.

   Nigel: I think it still is, though the Process has changed
   quite a bit since we published 2nd Ed.

Meeting close.

   Nigel: Thanks, that's been very useful. Reminder that our next
   meeting is on Wednesday
   ... next week, joint with APA, in addition to the regular
   Thursday call. I'm expecting to
   ... circulate joining details for the APA meeting, though
   possibly only a day or so prior to
   ... the meeting.
   ... [adjourns meeting]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    1. [15]The TTWG requests transition of TTML2 to Candidate
       Recommendation.
    2. [16]The earliest CR exit date will be 4 weeks after
       publication of the CR, i.e. the minimum permitted period.

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [17]scribe.perl version
    1.152 ([18]CVS log)
    $Date: 2018/02/22 16:19:53 $

     [17] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [18] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2018 16:26:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 22 February 2018 16:26:43 UTC