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

Re: IMSC1 preparation for CR.

From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 09:50:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAF_7JxDGJV92miH2+VMFD95dct3rpvUkxLU46Wvc3H_m9bcNpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Cc: W3C Public TTWG <public-tt@w3.org>
Hi Thierry,

Thanks for the summary.

I plan to have a revised ED for consideration during the call tomorrow.

> I will provie the wording, if you would like.

Sure. I will compare with the respec.js wording.

> In this section we should provide the CR exit criteria (I will draft also a baseline).

That would be appreciated.

>  We should reserve now a meeting slot with the Director.

How does 1 PM PDT on 9/29 sound?

>must show that the specification has met all Working Group requirements,
> or explain why the requirements have changed or been deferred,

I believe the specification satisfies its stated scope in Section 1.6
of the charter [1].

[1] http://www.w3.org/2014/03/timed-text-charter.html

> -  must document changes to dependencies during the development of the specification,

Normative references are stable and published.

> - must document how adequate implementation experience will be demonstrated,

Will this be captured in the "CR Exit Criteria" above? Below is my
take based on the (brief) discussion in Geneva.

- make available a repository of subtitle documents conforming to IMSC 1.
- invite implementers and users of IMSC 1 to process these subtitle documents
- document results (positive and negative)

> must specify the deadline for comments, which must be at least four weeks
> after publication, and should be longer for complex documents,

I recommend adding this to our agenda tomorrow. I suspect 4 weeks is
probably too short.

> - must show that the specification has received wide review, and

The specification has been reviewed by at least three external
organizations (DECE, SMPTE and EBU), as evidenced by liaison
communications [1-2] and comments filed against IMSC 1 [3]. Aspects of
the specification were also reviewed by the HTML accessibility media
sub-group [4].

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2014Jun/0000.html
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-tt/2014Sep/0000.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/343
[4] http://www.w3.org/2014/07/14-html-a11y-media-minutes.html

> may identify features in the document as "at risk".

AFAIK no features have been designated as such by the WG.

Best,

-- Pierre

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote:
> Pierre,
>
> I would like to start preparation of the publication of IMSC1 [1] as CR.
>
>
> We are targetting mid october for this publication. I propose Oct 14th, if
> that is OK with you. Following that week there is a publishing moratorium
> for TPAC 2014.
>
> Here is a list of the remaining tasks:
>
> 1-Finalyse the draft
> - finish the editor updates.
> - draft a new "Status of This Document". I will provie the wording, if you
> would like. In this section we should provide the CR exit criteria (I will
> draft also a baseline).
> - have the draft compliant with pubrules
>
> 2- Once the draft is done and frozen, we should have a resolution for the
> TTWG to agree to transition to CR.
>
> 3- We will need to achive the following according to the new W3C process [2]
> and therefore must organize a call with the director to move to CR. We
> should reserve now a meeting slot with the Director.
>
> - must show that the specification has met all Working Group requirements,
> or explain why the requirements have changed or been deferred,
> -  must document changes to dependencies during the development of the
> specification,
> - must document how adequate implementation experience will be demonstrated,
> - must specify the deadline for comments, which must be at least four weeks
> after publication, and should be longer for complex documents,
> - must show that the specification has received wide review, and
> - may identify features in the document as "at risk". These features may be
> removed before advancement to Proposed Recommendation without a requirement
> to publish a new Candidate Recommendation.
>
>
> And then we will be ready for CR publication ...
>
> Thierry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/tip/ttml-ww-profiles/ttml-ww-profiles.html
>
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#last-call
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2014 16:51:40 UTC

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