W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > May 2013

Re: [tt] minutes - 21 May 2013

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 18:49:29 -0600
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+dbAvX+gH7bDkZNJzHkYtk6+h=6WLneoBTioxPXFcK1MA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Cc: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>, W3C Web and TV <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com
> wrote:

> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
> wrote:
> > available at:
> >  http://www.w3.org/2013/05/21-webtv-minutes.html
> >
> > also as text below.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Mark Vickers!
> >
> > Please note that I've added the action item from this call
> > to Tracker as ACTION-114 at:
> >  https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/actions/114
> >
> > Kazuyuki
> >
> > ---
> >    [1]W3C
> >
> >       [1] http://www.w3.org/
> >
> >                                - DRAFT -
> >
> >                 Web and TV Interest Group Teleconference
> >
> > 21 May 2013
> >
> >    [2]Agenda
> >
> >       [2]
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2013May/0020.html
> >
> >    See also: [3]IRC log
> >
> >       [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/05/21-webtv-irc
> >
> > Attendees
> >
> >    Present
> >           Kaz, Pierre, Glenn, Jean-Charles, Mark_Vickers, Olivier
> >
> >    Regrets
> >    Chair
> >           Pierre
> >
> >    Scribe
> >           Mark
> >
> > Contents
> >
> >      * [4]Topics
> >          1. [5]Revised TTWG charter
> >          2. [6]Meeting time
> >      * [7]Summary of Action Items
> >      __________________________________________________________
> >
> >    <Mark_Vickers> pierre: Agenda: 1. meeting time. 2. TTWG Charter
> >    3. Testing project
> >
> > Revised TTWG charter
> >
> >    <olivier>
> >    [8]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2013AprJun
> >    /0136.html
> >
> >       [8]
> > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2013AprJun/0136.html
> >
> >    <pal_> [9]http://www.w3.org/2013/05/timed-text-charter.html
> >
> >       [9] http://www.w3.org/2013/05/timed-text-charter.html
> >
> >    <inserted> scribenick: Mark_Vickers
> >
> >    Pierre: The main addition to the charter is WebVTT
> >    ... There seems to be support in the TTWG, but some opposition
> >    on AC list discussion. Can the Web & TV industry provide some
> >    direction.
> >
> >    Olivier: One thing that could be useful is to point to adoption
> >    of both specs. Both specs have wide adoption. AC statements
> >    that TTML is irrelevant & noxious are concerning.
> >
> >    Pierre: TTML has had great adoption. It is the responsibility
> >    of W3C to harmonize the two.
> >
> >    Glenn: Harmonize implies merging into one. I expect both will
> >    exist. I think it will be good for both to be in one group.
> >    There has been much misinformation on TTML, for example on XSL.
> >    Having both in one group will decrease partisanship.
> >    ... Cox has asked for specific language in the charter asking
> >    for a level playing field and support of both.
> >
> >    <inserted> scribenick: olivier
> >
> >    Mark_Vickers: we've had too much of a focus on tech issues, not
> >    enough IMHO on doing what's best for people with hearing
> >    impairments
> >
> >    <glenn>
> >    [10]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2013May/0082.
> >    html
> >
> >      [10]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2013May/0082.html
> >
> >    Mark_Vickers: more important than this vs that architecture
> >
> >    <glenn>
> >    [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2013May/0087.
> >    html
> >
> >      [11]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2013May/0087.html
> >
> >    Mark_Vickers: in that regard fewer specs would be better than
> >    more
> >    ... would be good to see all TTML variants pulled into one
> >    ... and make sure we can maximally map the semantics between
> >    the two, if there are to be more than one spec
> >    ... if there can't be a mapping, we would lose information
> >
> >    <kaz> scribenick: Mark_Vickers
> >
> >    glenn: Do you think it's realistic that one community will give
> >    up one sntax?
> >
> >    olivier: I don't think that it's realistic for there to be one
> >    spec given current usage.
> >
> >    mark_vickers: I agree it's unlikely to be one spec, but I think
> >    it's worth stating that it's an ideal.
> >
> >    glenn: I don't agree with a single spec notion because I think
> >    it's impractical and causes more trouble.
> >    ... I agree it's important to serve the community for captions,
> >    both hearing and hearing-impaired.
> >
> >    Pierre: What about the goal of maximizing semantic
> >    compatibility?
> >
> >    glenn: To some degree. The goals of TTML were broader, for
> >    example in the use of SMIL. I wouldn't expect WebVTT to adopt
> >    that.
>
> Right. You're still able to put SMIL and whatever else into WebVTT
> cues, but they won't be interpreted by a browser natively.
>
>
> >    Pierre: But to the amount that one is a semantic superset of
> >    the other>
> >
> >    mark_vickers: what about when semantics cannot be mapped?
> >
> >    glenn: browsers need to support both formats
> >    ... The superset format can be mapped, but some information
> >    will be lost.
> >
> >    <pal_> [12]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Timed_Text_Efforts
> >
> >      [12] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Timed_Text_Efforts
> >
> >    pierre: Would it be worth sharing the TF list of adoption of
> >    TTML & WebVTT to show adoption of both?
> >    ... Can we come up with a requirement that all are happy?
> >
> >    glenn: it would be useful to identify the caption communities
> >
> >    olivier: the audio group has a hierarchy of developer,
> >    implementor, spec maker. In the case of timed text: user,
> >    author, implementor, spec maker
> >
> >    glenn: I'd order user, author first, but whether implementor or
> >    spec maker is first is unclear
> >
> >    olivier: an example is if something is tedious to specify, but
> >    important for implementors, you need to do the spec
> >
> >    glenn: I see the order as user, {author, implementor, spec
> >    maker} with the latter an unoredered list
> >
> >    pierre: I think author is a priority over the latter two
> >
> >    glenn: How about user, author, {`implementor, spec maker}?
> >
> >    <olivier> "ensure maximal interop"?
> >
> >    pierre: Some progress on community. How do we get to agreement
> >    on the points on mapping?
> >
> >    olivier: I like maximize semantic mapping
> >    ... what really worries me is that if the two evolve together,
> >    there will be mapping from one to the other, but if there's not
> >    a clear decision of which is a superset, we're in trouble
> >
> >    glenn: I like "Ensure maximal semantic interop"
> >    ... right now I beliebe WebVTT is a subset of TTML, as far as
> >    I'm aware.
>
> My understanding is the exact opposite: since TTML only focuses on
> captions, but WebVTT on captions, descriptions, metadata, and
> chapters, WebVTT has a broader applicability than TTML.
>

I'm afraid your understanding is incomplete. TTML is designed to support
all kinds of text with timing semantics. Captions and subtitles are just
one such example. It is equally capable of interchanging other applications
use of timed text, including descriptions, metadata, and chapters.

I just don't understand why folks in the VTT community spend so much time
making false statements about TTML. False statements like (1) TTML requires
XSL-FO, (2) TTML has narrower applicability than VTT, (3) TTML is complex
to implement, or (4) TTML would cause browser bloat. None of these claims
are true and I would caution those who think otherwise to prove their
claims if they intend to continue making them.


>
>
> >    ... for example TTML ability to specifiy feature priority
>
> Can you explain what "feature priority" means?
>
>
> >    ... if WebVTT is kept as a subset of TTML, that would maximize
> >    interop
>
> They are likely orthogonal in some features, which cannot be mapped to
> each other, but can map for others.
>

It would be useful to understand better what features are orthogonal and
what use cases drive this orthogonality. Could you provide a list?


>
>
> Thanks,
> Silvia.
>
>
> >    pierre: that is beyond the ability of this group,
> >
> >    <pal_> pal's notes:
> >
> >    <pal_> - need to provide better information
> >
> >    <pal_> - minimize profiles
> >
> >    <pal_> - user, author, {implementer, spec maker}
> >
> >    <pal_> - ensure maximal semantic interop (one format might be a
> >    superset of the other)
> >
> >    glenn: Perhaps just state one could be superset of another
> >
> > Meeting time
> >
> >    pierre: 8AM Los Angeles time on Thursdays
> >    ... What about 30th for next call?
> >
> >    everybody nods
> >
> >    <scribe> ACTION: Pierre to draft position statement and post to
> >    email [recorded in
> >    [13]http://www.w3.org/2013/05/21-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
> >
> >    <trackbot> Error finding 'Pierre'. You can review and register
> >    nicknames at <[14]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users>.
> >
> >      [14] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/users%3E.
> >
> >    Kaz's note: I've just created the following action item
> >    manually. [15]https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/actions/114
> >
> >      [15] https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/actions/114
> >
> >    <glenn> trackbot, end meeting
> >
> > Summary of Action Items
> >
> >    [NEW] ACTION: Pierre to draft position statement and post to
> >    email [recorded in
> >    [16]http://www.w3.org/2013/05/21-webtv-minutes.html#action01]
> >
> >    [End of minutes]
> >      __________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [17]scribe.perl version
> >     1.138 ([18]CVS log)
> >     $Date: 2013-05-21 14:23:43 $
> >
> >      [17] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
> >      [18] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
> > Tel: +81 466 49 1170
> >
>
>
Received on Saturday, 25 May 2013 00:50:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:09 UTC