{Minutes} TTWG Meeting 2019-03-14

Thanks all for attending today's TTWG meeting. Minutes can be found in HTML format at https://www.w3.org/2019/03/14-tt-minutes.html


In text format:


   [1]W3C

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


                Timed Text Working Group Teleconference

14 Mar 2019

   [2]Agenda

      [2] https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/26


   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] https://www.w3.org/2019/03/14-tt-irc


Attendees

   Present
          Nigel, Gary, Pierre, Andreas, Philippe, Glenn

   Regrets
          Cyril, Thierry, Mike

   Chair
          Nigel

   Scribe
          nigel

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]This meeting
         2. [6]September F2F meeting
         3. [7]Draft liaisons with MPEG and VR-IF about 360º
            subtitle positioning
         4. [8]TTML Profile Registry
         5. [9]WebVTT Implementation Report
         6. [10]TTWG Charter 2019
         7. [11]Meeting close
     * [12]Summary of Action Items
     * [13]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <scribe> scribe: nigel

This meeting

   Nigel: Today we have [iterates through agenda]

   Gary: We have something to cover with WebVTT

   Nigel: Ok
   ... I think we can cover all the issues today within the time.

   Andreas: Can we cover the f2f meeting at the beginning to make
   sure we have time?
   ... It's one of the most urgent parts.

   Nigel: OK I don't mind, if there are no objections.
   ... AOB or specific points to make sure we get to?

   group: [no other business]

September F2F meeting

   Nigel: I made a WBS survey, which was open for 2 weeks, and
   when it closed I looked at the results and notified the
   ... group of the conclusions.
   ... Since then a couple of people have commented that they want
   to reopen the discussion and at least one did not
   ... participate in the survey.

   Andreas: To start, I thought the survey was more an indicator
   of the preference of the members, not a decision tool.
   ... We need to decide what we want to achieve with this meeting
   and who is available and should attend.
   ... Also note who participated in the survey.
   ... 3 Editors have not voted, Gary, Pierre and Cyril.
   ... So this alone is important to know and means we need to
   discuss it to make sure the Editors are at the meeting.
   ... We should have a consensus in the group from the active
   members who want to participate.

   Nigel: Thanks for that. I took it that anyone wanting to
   participate in the meeting would respond to the survey.
   ... I made the decision based on the survey results because
   they were clear.
   ... Is there additional information?

   Glenn: I agree with Andreas, I was surprised that you took the
   survey as the result to make the decision, I think that
   ... was not correct. The group should make a decision.
   ... Clearly a lot of people have indicated for Amsterdam around
   IBC.

   [14]Survey results

     [14] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34314/2019_September-F2F/results


   Nigel: That's not accurate, see the results.

   Pierre: There was an important missing option, which was in
   Amsterdam concurrent with TPAC.

   Philippe: We don't require WGs to attend TPAC or not to
   conflict with TPAC either.
   ... It will be seen as poor form to meet concurrently to TPAC
   on the other side of the planet.
   ... We had cases in the past like the WebRTC WG in Shenzhen
   where some people wanted to meet in California, and
   ... others in TPAC. We organised a video link so people could
   remotely attend the TPAC meeting.
   ... I had an email exchange with Pierre off band. For my
   personal presence it is harder for me to commit to a full
   ... f2f meeting at TPAC due to my function compared to a f2f
   meeting outside of TPAC.
   ... I still would like to have someone from W3S from the
   meeting.
   ... If it is concurrent with TPAC but not at TPAC we will not
   have any W3S present.

   Pierre: The other missing option for the record was right after
   TPAC, in Europe.

   Nigel: I didn't include those two options because I thought we
   had already clearly ruled them out during discussions.

   Pierre: If that's the case my apologies, I don't recall that
   discussion.

   Andreas: I agree with Philippe that TPAC is extremely important
   and we would like to meet there if possible.
   ... It's an unfortunate coincidence with other meetings.
   ... Something to bear in mind is we are in discussion with the
   EBU group about taking on some functionality.
   ... In Geneva we planned a joint meeting, which can only happen
   in Europe, not in Japan.
   ... Nearly all the EBU group participants are at IBC so this
   would be an important point to make it in Europe.
   ... W3S should be there of course. Is Thierry planning to go to
   Fukuoka?

   Philippe: Yes, both of us.

   Andreas: If we want to do it in Europe it would be good to do
   it at the same time as TPAC because we could schedule
   ... calls or for people e.g. Philippe to join remotely from
   TPAC.

   Philippe: Yes, I give my priorities to disfunctional WGs and
   that doesn't include you guys!
   ... We can have a video link if needed.
   ... As Pierre noted, Eric Carlson did answer the survey, and we
   have other media related issues at TPAC for sure so I'm
   ... guessing he will attend TPAC.

   Pierre: As far as I can tell he is the one individual who would
   attend at TPAC but not elsewhere.

   <cyril> we should probably ask if Apple has representative at
   IBC at that time that could participate

   Nigel: As a matter of priority I think we need to consider the
   input of WG members over non-members.

   Philippe: s/WG member/active WG member

   Nigel: I don't share that view Philippe. The survey is a mixed
   picture.

   Pierre: Meeting during Fukuoka in Europe is another option, or
   just after.

   Andreas: I would propose meeting in Amsterdam on 18th and 19th
   September and putting that to the group.
   ... Of course I don't want to downplay anyone's role and votes.
   ... We need to look at the picture more closely and make a good
   decision which at the moment is at Amsterdam.

   Glenn: Our last two meetings have been in Europe, at EBU in
   January and TPAC in France.

   Nigel: I would not be able to attend in Amsterdam during TPAC.

   Glenn: It's better to go with Fukuoka and go with the video
   link for European attendees.
   ... My preference would be Fukuoka.
   ... I don't attend IBC anymore so that's not an issue for me.

   Pierre: We also ought to consider not having a meeting around
   that time at all, but meeting at some other time
   ... when there are agenda items.
   ... For instance, it would be easier for me to justify say
   flying to London or driving to San Jose for a TTWG meeting than
   ... flying to Fukuoka for 2 days.

   Glenn: I think there's enough impetus on moving forward to
   WebVTT and Gary's and Eric's work that it would be worth
   ... having a meeting in Fukuoka. We can make progress on a
   module for 360 if Vladimir is there also. I still think it is
   ... worth considering a meeting there.

   Pierre: Andreas is a proponent of 360 and it sounds like he
   will not be in Fukuoka.

   Glenn: Video link?

   Pierre: What time though? If we're trying to schedule an
   inconvenient meeting then it's not practical, so maybe
   ... schedule a different meeting.

   Philippe: We could schedule a half day afternoon meeting in
   Fukuoka, in the morning in Europe.

   Andreas: Bringing up the EBU thing I think we will have items
   for 2 days.
   ... If I understood our decisions in Geneva we plan to have
   something ready by the end of the year.

   Nigel: The timing of TPAC is quite good for making late
   decisions in our process.

   <cyril> what about limiting the scope of the meeting at TPAC to
   WebVTT and reschedule the TTML-part to another time/another
   location?

   Philippe: We could have a long video conference late in August.

   Nigel: See Cyril's input remotely - that is possible.

   Philippe: Yes assuming WebVTT stays in the Charter.

   Pierre: To the proposal from Philippe, if there's a topic that
   would benefit from being at TPAC because of links with
   ... other groups, that would be a 4 hour meeting probably,
   which could be done remotely.

   <cyril> if there is no WebVTT discussion, there is no need to
   have a meeting at TPAC

   Glenn: We could do two afternoons on TTML in Fukuoka.

   Pierre: We're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole

   Nigel: +1

   Glenn: A video link to Europe in the afternoon in Japan might
   work.

   Pierre: Why not let the work items drive the meeting. Put
   coordination topics on the agenda for Fukuoka and otherwise
   ... schedule a meeting as needed? Just throwing ideas.

   Andreas: I see no strong reasons to have the meeting in Fukuoka
   because a lot of people will not travel there, whereas
   ... in Amsterdam a lot of people would join. If both options
   are not good I would go with the idea of trying another
   ... face to face slot and meeting then. It's really important
   to have people in the same room together to make progress.

   Nigel: I need to close this discussion because of time, and
   synthesise some options based on the discussion. This
   ... is complex!
   ... We don't have a clear front runner right now.

Draft liaisons with MPEG and VR-IF about 360º subtitle positioning

   Nigel: There has been some non-WG reflector emails discussing a
   liaison text.

   Andreas: As proposed I shared a draft with Nigel, Mike, Pierre
   and Philippe to agree on a draft for a liaison, and
   ... Mike volunteered to help with the submission to MPEG, and
   made some improvements and proposals.
   ... He also said there seems to be a deadline for comments
   which is next week so we need to do something soon.
   ... It would be good to submit this liaison letter as soon as
   possible, I'm not sure what your opinion is Nigel, if you want
   ... to redraft it and send it to the reflector?

   Nigel: Yes please send the draft to the member-tt reflector.

   Andreas: It needs to be submitted early next week.

   <plh> +1 to Nigel

   Nigel: Please do that - I don't think the message is
   controversial so I would ask for a quick turnaround review and
   if
   ... there are no objections I will ask Mike to submit it on
   Monday or very early Tuesday.

   Philippe: I will take the action to check the liaison, I have
   an action item with Jeff Jaffe to figure this out.
   ... We need to be able to provide the documents. I will figure
   this out.

   Andreas: It is important if we want to send comments to MPEG
   the group needs access to the documents.

   Philippe: Yes, but I need time to figure out how to provide
   that access.
   ... You need those documents by yesterday, I'm guessing?

   Andreas: Yes, more or less!
   ... The background is some colleagues in VR-IF reviewed the
   MPEG draft, found inconsistency in how they use IMSC
   ... so I'm not sure if it would help if we as a group make a
   comment.
   ... The earlier the better. I asked the VR-IF people to send
   their comments to Nigel so he could forward them to the
   reflector.

   Nigel: I don't think I've received anything.

   Andreas: Hopefully tomorrow.

   Philippe: Who wants to see those documents from ISO and cannot
   see them today?

   Nigel: I'm not sure - my suggestion would be to send to
   member-tt so anyone can see them.

   Philippe: I'm trying to figure out how to prioritise this work
   and do it before the weekend especially if I have to check
   ... with legal that publishing on member-tt will not create an
   ISO mismatch. If that is the case I will send the documents
   ... to your inbox Nigel.

   Andreas: If that is possible it would be perfect.

   Nigel: Okay we have actions - Andreas to send the draft liaison
   message to member-tt and Philippe to work out how to share the
   MPEG documents.

TTML Profile Registry

   Nigel: There isn't much time on this today - I added a pull
   request to the agenda but we maybe should push it to next week.

   Glenn: I removed a misleading sentence from the IANA
   registration text on codecs.

   Nigel: My query is if that is really necessary.

   Glenn: I don't think we need a full IETF expert evaluation to
   remove a "for information" statement.
   ... We have controlling editorial authority on the registration
   now so even though Mike suggests we need expert review
   ... I think it is up to us to decide when to invoke it. My
   preference would be to remove it but if people want to leave
   ... in something that is misleading I could live with it but
   it's not preferable.

   Nigel: Let's leave that on the table for now and discuss
   offline.

WebVTT Implementation Report

   Gary: I sent out an update last week. I started working on
   STYLE block implementation for vtt.js so with Safari's
   implementation
   ... and that then the feature will no longer be at risk.
   ... I made a pull request against the repo marking a couple of
   things at risk so we can move forward with getting those
   ... things out as a new CR. Then hopefully we can remove those
   features, move that to a PR and create a new CR with
   ... those features put back in.

   Nigel: Can we do that or do we have to go back to WD?

   Philippe: You can do it if you can demonstrate wide review and
   the Director approves. That would need a transition request.

   Gary: That part can be done at another meeting. Is the marking
   things at risk something that everyone is in agreement
   ... on, removing those features and moving that version
   forward?
   ... I got a comment from Eric saying he was in agreement with
   that assuming we put the features back in later.

   Nigel: We have a Chairing vacuum here which as ever I'm
   reluctant to step in to.
   ... We need consensus on this and a CfC for publishing a CR.

   Philippe: Is there any objection?

   Nigel: Our Decision Policy is 2 weeks. The pull request
   decision policy began when the pull was opened, arguably.
   ... We still need a document to review with a proposal to
   publish as an updated CR.

   Gary: I believe the updated snapshot is what we want to
   publish.
   ... We don't need to remove the at risk features yet.

   Philippe: I guess we need a separate CfC email sent to the list
   to start the 2 weeks period.

   Nigel: That's what we normally do.

   Philippe: The proposal is to update the document as per the
   pull request. Can we have a link to the document generated
   ... by the pull request?

   Gary: No

   Philippe: We need pr preview enabled.

   Nigel: Will you take that offline to send a proposal to the WG
   Philippe?

   Philippe: Yes I will do

   Nigel: Thank you

TTWG Charter 2019

   Nigel: Please do review the pull requests on the Charter repo

   <plh>
   [15]https://raw.githack.com/w3c/webvtt/90265659a7b01fafba5e464f

   40ccbf781c6fdaa3/archives/2019-03-06/Overview.html

     [15] https://raw.githack.com/w3c/webvtt/90265659a7b01fafba5e464f40ccbf781c6fdaa3/archives/2019-03-06/Overview.html


   [16]Charter pull requests

     [16] https://github.com/w3c/charter-timed-text/pulls


Meeting close

   group: [discussion about enabling PR preview on VTT repo]

   Nigel: We're out of time for today, thank you everyone.
   [adjourns meeting]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [17]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([18]CVS log)
    $Date: 2019/03/14 17:15:50 $

     [17] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

     [18] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/







----------------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

---------------------