Minutes from [Media] subteam teleconference - September 1, 2010

The minutes from today's meeting can be found at:


Repeated here for convenience:

HTML-A11Y telecon
01 Sep 2010
See also: IRC log
Sean_Hayes, John_Foliot, Judy, Janina, Eric_Carlson, silvia
jf, John_Foliot, janina
. Topics 
1. Identify Scribe
2. Actions Review
3. User Requirements: Status & Intro at HTML-WG
4. Proof of Concept Demos
5. Technical Requirements Prioritizations and Dependencies
6. Candidate Technologies: WebSRT; WMML; TTML; SMIL3; Etc.
7. next meeting
. Summary of Action Items
<janina> agenda: this
<JF> JF will scribe today
<janina> scribe: jf
<janina> scribe: John_Foliot
Identify Scribe
Actions Review
<JF> Action 52
<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
<JF> Missed action deadline, but working actively
<JF> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/54
<JF> PLH has taken on the issue of ensuring we have a good hosting
location, and that all permissions are in order
<JF> Judy will follow up on confirmations and will advise
User Requirements: Status & Intro at HTML-WG
<JF> JS - proud and exicted after last weeks call - final edits are all in
<JF> Will investigate if this should be published as a note at W3C - down
the road
<JF> Judy - wants to cll out that Chairs have welcomed Janina to do a Q &
A on tomorrow's call
<JF> suggest that members of the sub-team join in on that call
<JF> Re: Section 1 - Judy did do several re-arrangings of that sections -
were provisional
<JF> still concerned abotu what is in that section: provisio in place
<JF> believes that Section 1 is still not properly organized
<JF> Question: who put in the Section 1 - autism section into the wiki?
Hope to re-balance it somewhat
<JF> but doesn't want to dilute anything and cause offence
<JF> Sean- it was provided by a colleague
<JF> Judy - it is great material, but will re-work it slightly to fit the
larger overal doc
<JF> JS - 1 quasi-substantive change after an exchange with Geoff
<JF> make a cleaner distincition between extended descrbed video and
extended captioning
<JF> 'extended' might cause confusion, so suggesting extended descriptive
description, and 'enhanced' captioing (i.e could contain HTML, etc.)
<JF> confusion seems to be resolved here
<JF> JS HTML weekly teleconference is Noon Bostom time tomorrow
<JF> irc channel = html-wg
<JF> JS intends to do a walk through on the doc at that call
<JF> focus on kinds of alternatives and requirements
<JF> hope to get more cooperation from the larger technical group - to
date there has been no response from anyone on the HTML WG mailing list
<JF> need to get greater involvement in developing the technical solutions
Proof of Concept Demos
<JF> JS: not much to say at this point
<JF> Q: should we reference this in the user Reqs document?
<JF> Silvia: prefer if we keep this seperate, so that we could build up
more demo examples
<JF> link to but keep seperate
<JF> Judy: thought - when WCAG2 was in CR, needed to provide 2
implementations of every requirement
<JF> some of the examples were not sure to remain stable, but many are
<JF> so perhaps accessible media examples could be rolled in as well
<JF> as demonstrations of what is expected/needed, not neccessarily how it
is to be done in HTML5
<JF> JS: Eric, what is/was your question/ issue on what he saw?
<JF> ERic: was able to view one of the movies (and transcoded to Ogg and
<JF> but did not have a copy of RealPlayer to view the second video
<JF> Ogg and/or MP4 more 'viewable' today
<JF> demo is so lod that existing software to play back may no longer
<JF> Janina will follow up to see if we can do something about the second
demo and view-ability
Technical Requirements Prioritizations and Dependencies
<janina> scribe: janina
jf is walking through his first cut, looking at controls access as an
example, what is must, what is should, what is may ...
<scribe> scribe: jf
Judy: interested in approach
good time to ensure that this is in fact the right approach
impression was that when we talked about this that rather than prioritize
all the user reqs, rather to prioritize what would be technically
is there a narrower task that would be useful to implementors, that could
be dealt with more quickly?
Judy: lot of pressure time-wise to deliver what we can ASAP
... can we identify the technical challenges alone?
Silvia: agrees with Judy that all we need is a table with the user-reqs
and then keep them sorted in different areas
Need to focus on a smaller view
Sean: we need to go through the text (as it has been evolving) and pull it
out as bullet points
i.e to ensure that all the procse is covered in bullet points
JS: is there anything in the prose that cannot be checked off in the
bullet points?
Eric: this is a difficult issue - if we don't provide a prioritized list
to the browser vendors then they will choose what they want
if it's difficult for hte experts, it will be even harder for the
Judy: accepts that this is an issue
but we don't have sufficient represntation of all expert communities
<silvia> I have moved the table to
if there is some way of finding a compromise that is helpful to browser
Sean: agrees with Eric that a prioritization is required
what can be reasonably implemented in the next few months?
it's about implementation priorities
step 1 get the list, then compare what has already been done?
Eric: what is most important that we all agree on what needs to be worked
on - key is interoperability
JS: agrees, what can we get into the browsers now?
Silvia agrees that we need to get to a state where browsers are in synch
pages need a disclaimer that this is NOT for implementaion, but a work in
JS: would like to be sure that we note that the specification must support
all of our user requirements
including the harder to implement features
we cannot put that off
Judy: was discussing earlier on how to take more advantage of process
culture in HTML WG
wqe need to generate a bug-list against the specs for any gaps or
thus having the technical challenges identified will assist in that
so generating a list of bugs of what we need as quickly as possible would
be useful
JS: suspects that this is true, but not sure if this is what we are
talking about here
Judy: is hoping that we could have a bug list in 2-3 weeks time (maximum)
JS: this relates to timing format discussion
Judy: thought we agreed not to 'choose' a time-format, but rather than
offer informed opinion
JS: hopes we don't get forced into making a decision
Silvia: suggest to copy over the the bullet list from the user
what is here is what we want, but this is not a fast nor easy process
are the bullet points complete?
JS: some bullet points might show up more than once
Silvia: agreed, but we need to start simple
JS: we have a plan...
(not completely captured in minutes, but Silvia will establish some early
examples, and JF will then work to flesh out
Sean: TTML
Candidate Technologies: WebSRT; WMML; TTML; SMIL3; Etc.
Sean: waiting on the table, but wanted to check to make sure that there is
a mapping in HTML5 to TTMl
Sean has put together a mapping on how to get from TTML to HTML5
there is a basic structure
first grab all the styles
TTML really only does inline styles
but there is a mechanism to group it all together
this is being explained
next is the time cue mechansim
so an examination of how to do that
once you have those 2 things, then take them and construct what Ian is
calling an HTML cue object
there is a pretty straightforward mapping
there is an HTML abstract of cue
it seems that it is pretty much a one-toone mapping
the XML nature is actually a benefit here
Ian has a concept of rendering rules, and Sean has thought about how that
would work
if you take the cue ( a rectangular region)
it can then be styled
and/or rendered elsewhere
Link for Sean (FYI) http://kazhack.org/?post/2010/08/26/HTML-Timing
Silvia: wants to point out that pieces of SMIL that are being used today
may not be re-usable for video
Judy: seems we might be able to steer the discussion towards the
capabilities of an established standard
has a powerful motivator
next meeting
JS: any further issues/questions?
Judy: to confirm, Silvia is 'priming the pump' for the prioritized tech
challenges document
then JF will take it on to continue theat work
is that enough for now?
Judy: just want to ensure that we keep moving - are there any other
additional tasks for this week?
<silvia> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Checklist
JS: closing up meeting

Received on Thursday, 2 September 2010 00:34:31 UTC