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

Re: {minutes} TTWG Meeting 11/9/2014

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 14:12:04 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2maknAw=HE0r04uZNwM+ppGEg9WCigNgOrcojhPWkCtEw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Cc: Courtney Kennedy <ckennedy@apple.com>, Public TTWG List <public-tt@w3.org>
Ah, thanks! That makes total sense now.

Best Regards,
Silvia.
On 12 Sep 2014 18:10, "Nigel Megitt" <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote:

>  We should be clear about *what* we're planning to write tests for: I'm
> expecting us to create tests for the mapping between the formats, i.e. not
> WebVTT presentation tests and not TTML presentation tests.
>
>  Of course it's quite likely that presentation test documents in either
> format can be used as sources for mapping tests too.
>
>  Kind regards,
>
>  Nigel
>
>   From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
> Date: Friday, 12 September 2014 01:37
> To: Courtney Kennedy <ckennedy@apple.com>
> Cc: Public TTWG List <public-tt@w3.org>, Nigel Megitt <
> nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: {minutes} TTWG Meeting 11/9/2014
>
>   Excellent. I'm sure you're aware of the test files in the WebKit
> repository, too, then, just making sure.
>
> Best Regards,
> Silvia.
> On 12 Sep 2014 10:35, "Courtney Kennedy" <ckennedy@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> Silvia,
>>
>> Thanks for these notes.  My team is not trying reinvent the test suite
>> approach, but instead we are focusing on creating test vtt files to
>> exercise the features in the spec.  We will add our content to the existing
>> github repository once we have it done.
>>
>> Courtney
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 5:12 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 1:12 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>> >> Thanks all for attending today's TTWG meeting. Minutes in HTML format
>> can be
>> >> found at: http://www.w3.org/2014/09/11-tt-minutes.html
>> >>
>> >> We made one Resolution: RESOLUTION: We will not update SDP-US for
>> TTML2.
>> >> The provisional period for this resolution under our Decision Policy
>> will
>> >> end on Thursday 25th September.
>> >>
>> >> Minutes in text format:
>> >>
>> >>   [1]W3C
>> >>
>> >>      [1] http://www.w3.org/
>> >>
>> >>                               - DRAFT -
>> >>
>> >>                Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
>> >>
>> >> 11 Sep 2014
>> >>
>> >>   See also: [2]IRC log
>> >>
>> >>      [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/11-tt-irc
>> >>
>> >> Attendees
>> >>
>> >>   Present
>> >>          pal, nigel, jdsmith, courtney, tmichel
>> >>
>> >>   Regrets
>> >>          glenn, andreas
>> >>
>> >>   Chair
>> >>          nigel
>> >>
>> >>   Scribe
>> >>          nigel
>> >>
>> >> Contents
>> >>
>> >>     * [3]Topics
>> >>         1. [4]This meeting
>> >>         2. [5]Geneva F2F September
>> >>         3. [6]Santa Clara F2F October (TPAC)
>> >>         4. [7]Action items
>> >>         5. [8]Issues
>> >>         6. [9]IMSC 1 Issues
>> >>     * [10]Summary of Action Items
>> >>     __________________________________________________________
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Date: 11 September 2014
>> >>
>> >>   <scribe> scribeNick: nigel
>> >>
>> >> This meeting
>> >>
>> >> Geneva F2F September
>> >>
>> >>   [11]https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/geneva2014
>> >>
>> >>     [11] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/geneva2014
>> >>
>> >>   courtney: My goal is to have sample code that will map from
>> >>   TTML to WebVTT and back the other way and also a paper that
>> >>   ... describes how to do the mapping both ways. I've made a lot
>> >>   of progress - it won't be finished next week. I want to go
>> >>   through the TTML attributes.
>> >>   ... Andreas has also been working on a mapping and we've been
>> >>   coordinating our efforts. He's focussed on the EBU-TT-D profile
>> >>   primarily. He also wants to present his work.
>> >>   ... I've identified some areas in both specs where there is no
>> >>   equivalent, and it would be good to highlight those.
>> >
>> > Good. I am curious about those, too.
>> >
>> >
>> >>   nigel: +1
>> >>   ... Is there a good version of WebVTT we should be referencing?
>> >>
>> >>   courtney: I'm using the most recent draft, which I think will
>> >>   become 1.0.
>> >>
>> >>   <courtney> [12]http://dev.w3.org/html5/webvtt/
>> >>
>> >>     [12] http://dev.w3.org/html5/webvtt/
>> >
>> > Yes, that's appropriate.
>> >
>> >
>> >>   nigel: Great, we'll use that as our baseline dated on Tuesday.
>> >>   ... Without wishing to steal Frans's thunder, he tells me EBU
>> >>   has offered to sponsor lunch on both days. Thanks EBU!
>> >>   ... I'll ask for it at 12:30.
>> >>   ... On day 2 we have a write-a-test hackathon - any thoughts on
>> >>   the test format?
>> >>
>> >>   courtney: There's no test suite for WebVTT yet - my team is
>> >>   working on that.
>> >
>> > There is a whole test suite at
>> > https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/webvtt .
>> > Also, there are in-band WebM files at
>> > https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/media if you
>> > need it from in-band.
>> >
>> > I hope you're not trying to create a separate way of building a test
>> > suite - that's the now standard automated test suite approach in that
>> > github repository.
>> >
>> > It would be great if you could contribute though and help fix any
>> > bugs! That would also help work towards taking WebVTT to CR.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Silvia.
>> >
>> >>   ... The TTML test suite covers a lot of cases, so one thought I
>> >>   had is to convert them all to WebVTT.
>> >>   ... We're also looking at it from the WebVTT spec perspective.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: I understood that Wednesday's work will be for testing
>> >>   the mappings rather than each spec.
>> >>   ... How much time do we need to set aside for IMSC 1 blocking
>> >>   issues on Wednesday?
>> >>
>> >>   pal: I think there's only one real issue for discussion, which
>> >>   is #overflow because there's a difference in understanding of
>> >>   the impact.
>> >>   ... On the other ones, largely from the comments so far I don't
>> >>   expect much discussion.
>> >>   ... On Change Proposal 28 that's something I'm not sure we need
>> >>   any more. We may be able to remove that.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: I'll re-examine CP28 and see if I can withdraw it.
>> >>
>> >>   pal: Without that I think that leaves Issue-339, and I don't
>> >>   expect us to need more than 1 hour on that.
>> >>   ... I'll be happy to drive the IMSC 1 issues on Wednesday
>> >>   morning.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: We also have an agenda item on our TTWG process.
>> >>
>> >>   pal: Did we resolve that?
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: The consensus call had an end date of Wednesday. I
>> >>   intend to raise it on Wednesday and conclude the topic with a
>> >>   resolution. So far I've heard no negative comments.
>> >>
>> >> Santa Clara F2F October (TPAC)
>> >>
>> >>   [13]http://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/tpac2014
>> >>
>> >>     [13] http://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/tpac2014
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: The structure of each day is a little different than
>> >>   last year - WG meetings will run 0830-1100 and 1500-1800 with
>> >>   lunch and ad hoc meetings from 1100-1500.
>> >>   ... Please let me know if you need a telco facility.
>> >>
>> >>   pal: I suggest planning for one, and not using it if we don't
>> >>   need it.
>> >>
>> >>   tmichel: I suggest using it for specific slots rather than the
>> >>   entire day.
>> >>   ... There's no difference in terms of cost but we need to
>> >>   reserve the speaker phone.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: I'll amend our wbs survey and reserve it.
>> >>   ... I expect the agenda to be TTML2 and the TTML<-->WebVTT
>> >>   mapping.
>> >>
>> >>   pal: I suggest we take 30 minutes next week to discuss the CR
>> >>   process and next steps and timeline for IMSC 1, based on
>> >>   whether we use the 2005 or 2014 process.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: good point.
>> >>
>> >> Action items
>> >>
>> >>   action-325?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> action-325 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Check if
>> >>   respec has been updated for the 2014 w3c process -- due
>> >>   2014-09-11 -- PENDINGREVIEW
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [14]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/325
>> >>
>> >>     [14] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/325
>> >>
>> >>   pal: Respec has been given an additional config option to
>> >>   select process, so that's all done as far as I can tell.
>> >>
>> >>   close action-325
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Closed action-325.
>> >>
>> >>   action-322?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> action-322 -- Jerry Smith to Indicate preference for
>> >>   updating sdp-us for ttml2 -- due 2014-08-21 -- PENDINGREVIEW
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [15]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/322
>> >>
>> >>     [15] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/322
>> >>
>> >>   jdsmith: I think focusing on IMSC rather than updating SDP-US
>> >>   is the better path. We're the only current implementor that I
>> >>   know of and I don't think we see value in revving the spec or
>> >>   the implementation.
>> >>
>> >>   RESOLUTION: We will not update SDP-US for TTML2.
>> >>
>> >>   close action-322
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Closed action-322.
>> >>
>> >>   action-324?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> action-324 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Draft a note
>> >>   for imsc 1 progressivelydecodable to make concrete what authors
>> >>   should take into account -- due 2014-08-21 -- PENDINGREVIEW
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [16]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/324
>> >>
>> >>     [16] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/324
>> >>
>> >>   close action-324
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Closed action-324.
>> >>
>> >> Issues
>> >>
>> >>   issue-344?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> issue-344 -- Add a clarification note expressing
>> >>   intent behind unqualified attribute names -- raised
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [17]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/344
>> >>
>> >>     [17] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/344
>> >>
>> >>   reopen issue-344
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Re-opened issue-344.
>> >>
>> >> IMSC 1 Issues
>> >>
>> >>   issue-340?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> issue-340 -- Make clear that the use of the
>> >>   ttp:profile attribute is not required. -- pending review
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [18]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/340
>> >>
>> >>     [18] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/340
>> >>
>> >>   pal: I made two changes to implement this, both a note and a
>> >>   change of wording from 'profile SHALL be associated' to
>> >>   'profile is associated'.
>> >>
>> >>   <scribe> ACTION: frans Review resolution to Issue-340 and add
>> >>   review comments to issue [recorded in
>> >>   [19]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/11-tt-minutes.html#action01]
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Created ACTION-326 - Review resolution to issue-340
>> >>   and add review comments to issue [on Frans de Jong - due
>> >>   2014-09-18].
>> >>
>> >>   issue-343?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> issue-343 -- Processing of non-IMSC/TTML namespace
>> >>   elements -- pending review
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [20]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/343
>> >>
>> >>     [20] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/343
>> >>
>> >>   <scribe> ACTION: frans Review resolution to Issue-343 and add
>> >>   review comments to issue [recorded in
>> >>   [21]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/11-tt-minutes.html#action02]
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Created ACTION-327 - Review resolution to issue-343
>> >>   and add review comments to issue [on Frans de Jong - due
>> >>   2014-09-18].
>> >>
>> >>   pal: We have some issues making blanket statements about
>> >>   foreign namespaces here - the rule is simpler: if it's not
>> >>   forbidden then it's allowed.
>> >>   ... I couldn't find a way to word it relating to foreign
>> >>   namespaces without getting really convoluted.
>> >>   ... Because there are some things from specified foreign
>> >>   namespaces from SMPTE and EBU that are permitted.
>> >>   ... The next issues aren't captured yet in the tracker because
>> >>   I wanted to make sure that the reflector didn't generate
>> >>   further comments.
>> >>   ... Those are the three issues I emailed about yesterday:
>> >>   issue-332, issue-342, issue-339.
>> >>
>> >>   issue-332?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> issue-332 -- #cellResolution support -- open
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [22]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/332
>> >>
>> >>     [22] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/332
>> >>
>> >>   pal: I don't expect much further concern on this. The
>> >>   background is simple: IMSC 1 forbids ttp:cellResolution. The
>> >>   request was for any permitted value to be used.
>> >>   ... That only affects the maths for the c metric, and there's
>> >>   no further impact. So the proposal is to lift the prohibition.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: LGTM
>> >>
>> >>   pal: I plan to implement these changes if I don't hear any more
>> >>   in the next few days.
>> >>
>> >>   issue-342?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> issue-342 -- Add ebutts:multiRowAlign and
>> >>   ebutts:linePadding attributes to the IMSC Text Profile -- open
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [23]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/342
>> >>
>> >>     [23] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/342
>> >>
>> >>   pal: These extensions are intended to allow timed text
>> >>   presentation of a style that's consistent with European
>> >>   practice, and perhaps elsewhere in the world.
>> >>   ... This does require adding a feature to the IMSC layout
>> >>   engine, but not to the HRM. It looks like a processor can
>> >>   ignore them and still yield reasonable results. My suggestion
>> >>   is to add those features,
>> >>   ... even as a SHALL, and move forward with that. The only
>> >>   caveat is these features may appear in TTML2.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: This is analogous to the IMSC 1 situation with
>> >>   forcedDisplay, in that TTML2 may do it differently and IMSC 2
>> >>   would adopt the TTML2 way.
>> >>
>> >>   Issue-342: Make sure to include a note along the lines of the
>> >>   forcedDisplay note that TTML2 and IMSC 2 may do it differently.
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> Notes added to Issue-342 Add ebutts:multiRowAlign
>> >>   and ebutts:linePadding attributes to the IMSC Text Profile.
>> >>
>> >>   issue-339?
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot> issue-339 -- Allow the use of #overflow -- open
>> >>
>> >>   <trackbot>
>> >>   [24]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/339
>> >>
>> >>     [24] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/339
>> >>
>> >>   pal: F2F discussion may be needed here. IMSC 1 forbids
>> >>   tts:overflow="visible" because that mutes the specified extent
>> >>   of the region.
>> >>   ... This has profound implications for the HRM and because from
>> >>   an authorial standpoint, to me and others, the author has no
>> >>   idea how big the region will eventually be.
>> >>   ... I'm also trying to understand what the use cases are for
>> >>   tts:overflow="visible" provides a benefit.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: There's a tension here between region size and font
>> >>   size, where rendered font sizes can not be known at authoring
>> >>   time.
>> >>   ... Overflow allows for some safety there.
>> >>
>> >>   pal: That's what reference fonts are designed to address.
>> >>
>> >>   courtney: What about when implementations allow users to
>> >>   override settings?
>> >>
>> >>   pal: In that case the implementation would need to know how to
>> >>   expand the regions to compensate, if, say, the font size is
>> >>   doubled.
>> >>   ... I'm happy to add a note to the spec to explain this.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: At first a reflector response along those lines (i.e.
>> >>   about reference fonts) would be helpful.
>> >>
>> >>   pal: Notwithstanding CP28 I think this concludes all the
>> >>   outstanding notes on IMSC, so we have a realistic shot at
>> >>   moving along on our proposed timeline - thank you all.
>> >>
>> >>   nigel: adjourns meeting - thanks all, and see you at 0900 at
>> >>   the EBU in Geneva!
>> >>
>> >> Summary of Action Items
>> >>
>> >>   [NEW] ACTION: frans Review resolution to Issue-340 and add
>> >>   review comments to issue [recorded in
>> >>   [25]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/11-tt-minutes.html#action01]
>> >>   [NEW] ACTION: frans Review resolution to Issue-343 and add
>> >>   review comments to issue [recorded in
>> >>   [26]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/11-tt-minutes.html#action02]
>> >>
>> >>   [End of minutes]
>> >>     __________________________________________________________
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [27]scribe.perl version
>> >>    1.138 ([28]CVS log)
>> >>    $Date: 2014-09-11 15:07:25 $
>> >>     __________________________________________________________
>> >>
>> >>     [27] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>> >>     [28] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> ____________
>> Courtney Kennedy 408.974.3386, mobile: 408.771.8615
>> Engineering Manager, Media Sharing
>> Apple, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>>
Received on Saturday, 13 September 2014 04:12:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:17 UTC