W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > May 2014

Re: Liaison response - template on MIME type parameter for TimedText

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 16:27:54 -0700
Cc: public-tt@w3.org
Message-id: <7C80E018-91AD-4F89-852F-2DDE0F4B2F9F@apple.com>
To: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@telecom-paristech.fr>

On May 5, 2014, at 4:42 , Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@telecom-paristech.fr> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Some points worth highlighting/repeating:
> 
> - Aside from the MP4 problem, the problem is general. Consider a DASH MPD pointing to a TTML file (not packaged in a MP4). How can a player know that it'll be able to play it meaningfully without downloading the entire TTML file? Does it actually need to know or will it always be able to do something with a TTML file? The solution to this problem will provide the basis for the solution to the MP4 problem. Has the TTML WG considered defining a 'codecs' or 'profile' MIME parameter for TTML?

good point.  it would be nice if the sub-parameter for the codecs parameter when TTML is in MP4 were the same as the value of a parameter when the TTML is supplied not in a wrapper.

> 
> - the codecs parameter of MP4 files is useful for identifying the content of each track in the file before the file is fully downloaded. In Adaptive Streaming contexts such as DASH, the initialization segment can also be downloaded in a first step to get information. So the codecs parameter does not have to provide all information. It could just indicate that the track contains some flavor of TTML and let the initialization segment provide more details. In that case, the solution could be as simple as: codecs=“stpp.ttml"

That’s legal under the current proposal.  But there was some hope that we could differentiate the profiles/variants of TTML, for players that ‘do’ say EBU but not another variant.

> 
> - If more than TTML is needed, remember that a typical workflow for packaging/dashing is: get one (or more) TTML file, package it into an (existing) MP4 file, produce an MPD from that MP4 file. Only in the last step is the 'codecs' parameter generated. In MSE cases, you don't even need the MPD but you need to get (most likely in JS) the codecs parameter to create the source buffer. Ideally, the TTML 'codecs' string generator should not have to look at the content of the TTML document, only at the track sample entry (similar to AVC codecs generation).
> 
> Regards,
> Cyril
> 
> 03/05/2014 20:01, David Singer a écrit :
>> On May 3, 2014, at 9:06 , Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:23 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Apr 30, 2014, at 16:40 , Michael Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Nigel, Dave and all-
>>>> 
>>>> Is there a TTWG Proposal?
>>>> 
>>>> Would “stpp” be registered somewhere where it would be unambiguous from other Codecs strings unrelated to TTML?  I don’t mean the sample entry 4C code, but in the Codecs string namespace.  Wouldn’t it have to be “application/mp4+stpp….”?  Or why not use “application/ttml+xml” (and similar for WebVTT)?
>>> The codecs string starts with the 4CC of the sample entry.  After that, whoever defined that 4CC gets to say what’s the next element.  And they get to say what’s after that, and so on.
>>> 
>>> stpp says “some sort of XML”,
>>> 
>>> since VTT isn't XML, then would it use something different from stpp?
>> yes, we have different 4CCs for text-based and XML-based formats.  stpp is for XML-based
>> 
>>>  and is owned by MPEG.  So indeed the step that goes from ‘stpp’ to ‘some sort of TTML’ is owned by MPEG, and MPEG still needs to resolve this.
>>> 
>>> The thrust is that IF MPEG solves that, THEN there will be names to identify TTML dialects, that could go next.  So you would see
>>> 
>>> codecs=stpp.<some MPEG magic to say it is TTML happens>.TTMLFULL+IMSC+SDPUS+EBUTT
>>> 
>>> I would expect something more simple, e.g.
>>> 
>>> stpp.vtt
>>> stpp.ttml.tt1f
>>> stpp.ttml.tt1p
>>> stpp.ttml.tt1t
>>> stpp.ttml.sdpu
>>> stpp.ttml.st10
>>> stpp.ttml.st13
>> indeed, MPEG is likely to say that TTML means “go to the W3C, thou sluggard, and be wise”
>> 
>>> where we have a registry for mapping the third IDs above to TTML profile designators, e.g.
>>> 
>>> tt1f -> http://www.w3.org/ns/ttml/dfxp-full
>>> tt1p -> http://www.w3.org/ns/ttml/dfxp-presentation
>>> tt1t -> http://www.w3.org/ns/ttml/dfxp-transformation
>>> tt1u -> http://www.w3.org/ns/ttml/sdp-us
>>> s10f -> http://www.smpte-ra.org/schemas/2052-1/2010/profiles/smpte-tt-full
>>> s13f -> http://www.smpte-ra.org/schemas/2052-1/2013/profiles/smpte-tt-full
>>> 
>>> we definitely do not want to create a new syntax/language for use in codecs that describes some way to combine profiles; that function is already defined by the ttml profile definition document syntax
>> we’re not, but we have to indicate somehow that a document is compatible with more than one profile.  we also are not restricted here to a 4-character-name, so we can use slightly longer names if they are mnemonic.
>> 
>> we can’t split into several entries as you suggest;  there is one entry per track, those separated by commas.
>> 
>> codecs=stpp.ttml.tt1f,stpp.ttml.tt1p
>> 
>> means two tracks, whereas
>> 
>> codecs=stpp.ttml.tt1f+tt1p
>> 
>> means one track compatible with two TTML profiles.  Big difference. (I am not wedded to plus, but comma and period are both taken already)
>> 
>>>  
>>> for example.
>>> 
>>> For the TTWG to say “yes, we’ll take on dialect naming and forming that second-level parameter” is important; it then means that if MPEG finds a clean solution to the first level, the actual problem in hand is solved.  I’d like the MP4 people to realize before the July meeting that this is urgent, and come up with ideas and maybe online discussion ASAP.
>>> 
>>> This is all provisional — on the TTWG getting agreement not only internally, but with the partners; and on us all liking the final result, of course.
>>> 
>>> Makes sense?
>>> 
>>>> I understand how one could signal profiles of TTML that a document conformed to concurrently, as in the example – all of TTML and EBU-TT.  But the signaling requirements go beyond that – there is often multiple namespaces in use in one document that are not, as an aggregate, a single “profile”. So, these must be explicitly signaled as well since nearly all profiles permit foreign namespaces.  To accommodate this, the “short names” have to be defined as “profiles of namespaces” I think.
>>>> 
>>>> For example, if a document uses the CFF-TT text profile of the TTML Full profile, plus SMPTE-TT #608 (US captions), plus CFF-TT metadata, and it was compatible with IMSC, SDP-US and EBU-TT, then it might look like: Codecs=xxxxx.TTMLFULL+IMSC+SDPUS+EBUTT+CFFT+CFFM+SMPTE608.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>>                 Mike
>>>> 
>>>> p.s. I would give the SC29 Secretary a hint about the target of the liaison (MPEG v JPEG).  And, you understand you will not receive a reply until mid-to-late July, right?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Nigel Megitt [mailto:nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 11:48 AM
>>>> To: watanabe@itscj.ipsj.or.jp
>>>> Cc: Timed Text Working Group
>>>> Subject: Liaison response - template on MIME type parameter for TimedText
>>>> 
>>>> Dear Mr. Watanabe,
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for your liaison N14444 of April 2014.
>>>> 
>>>> We think that we can indeed find a solution together.  We are looking into creating a table of formal "short names" for the profiles of W3C TTML and
>>>> the profiles of formats derived from it (such as SMPTE-TT, EBU-TT, and so on).  If MPEG were to propose how to step from the four-character-code of
>>>> the sample entry (XMLSubtitleSampleEntry and XMLMetaDataSampleEntry) to something that identifies "a document compatible with one or more profiles of TTML", then we could propose a string composed of a set of one or more these short names as the next parameter.
>>>> 
>>>> For example, say W3C defines two profile short names "W3CTTML" and "EBUTTML", and MPEG defines the name "TTML" as referring to the overall
>>>> family, one might see
>>>> 
>>>> codecs=stpp.TTML.W3CTTML+EBUTTML,avc1
>>>> 
>>>> as a codecs string of a file carrying AVC (H.264) and TTML subtitles that
>>>> are additionally EBU-TT conformant.
>>>> 
>>>> We would check with those deriving from TTML (e.g. at SMPTE, EBU and DECE) if this approach and design are acceptable, before we formalise this.
>>>> 
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Nigel Megitt, David Singer (chairs, Timed Text Working Group, W3C)
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>> Nigel Megitt
>>>> Lead Technologist, BBC Technology, Distribution & Archives
>>>> Telephone: +44 (0)3030807996
>>>> Internal (Lync): 0807996
>>>> BC4 A3 Broadcast Centre, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TP
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ----------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> 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.
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------
>>>> 
>>> David Singer
>>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> David Singer
>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cyril Concolato
> Multimedia Group / Telecom ParisTech
> http://concolato.wp.mines-telecom.fr/
> @cconcolato
> 
> 

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2014 23:28:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:15 UTC