W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio-description@w3.org > March 2019

{Minutes} ADCG Meeting 2019-03-20

From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 12:16:57 +0000
To: "public-audio-description@w3.org" <public-audio-description@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D8B7DF22.3F613%nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Thanks to those who could join today’s call. We were a small bunch, but made some good progress I think.

In particular, there seems to be consensus at the moment on issue 1 (https://github.com/w3c/adpt/issues/1) that we only need to support media timebase at first. If that seems wrong to you, please do add a comment to the issue.

Minutes can be found in HTML form at https://www.w3.org/2019/03/20-audio-description-minutes.html


In text form:


   [1]W3C

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


                   Audio Description Community Group

20 Mar 2019

   [2]Agenda

      [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio-description/2019Mar/0003.html


   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] https://www.w3.org/2019/03/20-audio-description-irc


Attendees

   Present
          Nigel, Óran, Tracey

   Regrets

   Chair
          Nigel

   Scribe
          nigel

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]This meeting
         2. [6]Issues
         3. [7]Status with TTWG
         4. [8]Speed scan through document
     * [9]Summary of Action Items
     * [10]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <scribe> scribe: nigel

This meeting

   Nigel: [iterates through agenda]
   ... Any other business?

   group: [no other business]

Issues

   Nigel: We have 4 open issues, only one of which is really
   important

   [11]Issues on ADPT

     [11] https://github.com/w3c/adpt/issues


   Nigel: Issue 4 is typos, following Cyril's review
   ... Issue 3 is another editorial task fixing an HTML fragment
   id
   ... Issue 2 was raised by me, and its about removing a note
   about DFXP, which is again mainly editorial
   ... Issue 1 is the main one I wanted to discuss

   [12]https://github.com/w3c/adpt/issues/1


     [12] https://github.com/w3c/adpt/issues/1


   Nigel: My first list of features only included media time, but
   the first edit of the document includes media time,
   ... clock time and smpte timecode.

   Tracey: Editing AD scripts is easier from a practical point of
   view if they use smpte timecode

   Nigel: My reference was that IMSC for subtitles only supports
   media time.
   ... Also, even with media timebase you can still use frame
   based time expressions.
   ... The question is then whether the reference point is the
   beginning of the media (e.g. the equivalent of, say 10:00:00:00
   ... in timecode), or the zero timecode point.
   ... There have been issues reported in the past about the use
   of smpte timecode especially in discontinuous mode,
   ... if the burned in timecode in video doesn't reflect the
   timecode data, for example. Also the complexity of the
   ... AD files themselves would be increased because relative
   times cannot be used inside the document, so every
   ... time would have to be replaced by a fixed non-relative
   smpte timecode label.
   ... I discussed this with Yella Umbrella a few weeks ago and
   the conclusion was they could live without SMPTE timecode.
   ... My proposal is to simplify the spec as much as possible and
   only support media timebase, and possibly include
   ... some examples of how they could work with SMPTE
   timecode-like values in them.
   ... I could propose use of some metadata to signal the basis of
   time expressions.

   Óran: I tend to agree, it's unnecessary to include smpte
   timebase in the document.

   Nigel: Is there a need for clock times too?

   Óran: I can't imagine there is for AD.

   Tracey: Not for AD

   Nigel: OK we're in agreement here for now, so just for the
   minutes, we have a (small) consensus to support media timebase
   only,
   ... so we can record that and if anyone disagrees let them come
   back via the issue or the reflector.
   ... That's all the issues.

Status with TTWG

   Nigel: Sorry for missing this before!
   ... W3C process means that only Working Groups can publish
   Recommendations, i.e. standards.
   ... Timed Text Working Group (TTWG) works on TTML
   specifications, and I also Chair that.
   ... I proposed that TTWG adopts this and that proposal was
   accepted, for work in 2019.
   ... The TTWG Charter is being revised to include it, hopefully
   to be confirmed in May or June.
   ... That Charter will refer to our document as the basis.
   ... So we have a few weeks or so to get the document in as good
   a state as possible.

Speed scan through document

   Nigel: Any initial high level comments on the document?

   Óran: Having trouble navigating through the page.

   Tracey: I will go through it with Óran.

   Nigel: Is there anything we can do to help that?

   Óran: The way the document is labelled and the navigation
   system works is a bit cumbersome.

   Nigel: I'd like to know more about that.

   Óran: Like a lot of web pages, their layout is not very well
   formatted for use with screen readers so navigating headings

   scribe: Óran: can be a bit tricky. I encounter this quite a
   lot.

   Nigel: It would be super-helpful to be able to feed any issues
   back to W3C and to the team maintaining the Respec tool.
   ... [iterates through document]
   ... Seems like the Introduction should go as close to the top
   as possible.

   Óran: Yes!

   Nigel: I would also like to move one or more of the examples
   into the introduction to help readers understand the
   ... kind of document that is being specified.

   Óran: Yes.

   Nigel: Then there's a section on Workflow and another on
   Requirements. Some of the workflow can probably move to
   ... the Introduction, if it helps understand the scope.

   Tracey: Yes, the diagram especially.

   Nigel: Then the detail, and the list of requirements I would
   put into an appendix.

   Tracey: Yes

   Óran: Yes, I can't see the diagram of course!

   Nigel: True - that's why there's a table listing the workflow
   steps, though it's not a 100% perfect replacement, more an
   ... extra layer of detail.
   ... Then we have the Profile section itself, which is very
   short, and just references the Constraints section.
   ... The Constraints section is the main body of the
   specification. It describes the encoding, namespaces,
   extensibility,
   ... synchonisation, profile signalling, and most importantly of
   all, the set of permitted or prohibited TTML features.
   ... Those features are the most important thing! I'd hope to
   move those closer to the top of the document too.
   ... In IMSC, for example, they're in section 6, here they've
   got down to section 9.
   ... then there are appendices, the examples, Web Audio mixing,
   acknowledgements and references.
   ... Any other observations about the document structure?

   Tracey: It's the most detail I've seen.

   Óran: Is embedding audio description something to be discussed?

   Nigel: I think the scope of this is upstream of embedding - the
   goal here is to define the script and the audio mixing,
   ... which can be used to generate the audio for embedding.
   There are already other standards for embedding, so in that
   ... sense it is not needed.

   Óran: Yes

   Nigel: I wouldn't rule out in-band carriage of the TTML AD
   script as a piece of work in the future, to provide the script
   ... and audio to a player for native playback or screen reader
   use, for example.
   ...
   ... Okay, that's our agenda, and we're a bit over time. I will
   turn those into editing actions and follow up with John Birch.
   ... If he can't do the editing then I will try to.
   ... Thanks for joining. [adjourns meeting]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [13]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([14]CVS log)
    $Date: 2019/03/20 12:15:53 $

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

     [14] 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.

---------------------
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2019 12:17:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 20 March 2019 12:17:23 UTC