{minutes} TTWG Meeting 2015-01-08

Thanks all for attending today's Timed Text Working Group Meeting. Minutes in HTML format are available at http://www.w3.org/2015/01/08-tt-minutes.html

As discussed at the end of the meeting, I will mark the following issues, all of which were held in Pending Review while we discussed the ttm:item based solution, as Closed. If further problems arise relating to any of these features please raise as a new issue for each problem. The list of issues is: 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249 and 250.

Text format minutes:


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

                Timed Text Working Group Teleconference

08 Jan 2015

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2015/01/08-tt-irc


          glenn, nigel, tmichel, pal, Andreas, jdsmith





     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]This meeting and future planning
         2. [5]Action Items
         3. [6]Issues
     * [7]Summary of Action Items

   <trackbot> Date: 08 January 2015

   <scribe> scribeNick: nigel

This meeting and future planning

   nigel: Any other business?

   pal: ITU-R liaison
   ... Also the comment from Simon Hailes on IMSC1

   nigel: also a F2F possibility
   ... Looking at the TTML2 timeline, we had said that we'd freeze
   the ED on 4th Jan prior to the FPWD.

   glenn: I'm trying to get into place spec text for all proposed
   new features. There's one more that
   ... I've been contemplating, which is adding support for an
   anchor link functionality.
   ... I wanted to get all the 'new syntax' issues knocked off.
   The other issues that don't require
   ... new syntax I will address either via an Editorial Note or
   by editing directly.
   ... I'm trying to finish that all up this week and then get a
   document ready for FPWD review.

   nigel: We will have a 2 week review period for the group before
   requesting publication.

   glenn: We should be able to target the review period starting
   on Monday.

   nigel: Will that have addressed all the P1 change proposals?

   glenn: I believe so, in terms of new features, but not
   necessarily all the new material, e.g.
   ... the HTML mapping, which doesn't require new syntax and can
   be done later.

   nigel: Okay it looks like we need to push all the dates back by
   1 week.

   tmichel: After the 2 week review the group will okay FPWD

   nigel: correct.
   ... Thank you Pierre for putting together a graphical view of
   our publications timeline:


      [8] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/Publications

   nigel: When I looked at this it seemed to me that a F2F might
   be needed around April to
   ... help stick to these dates.

   group: discusses potential locations too - preference for west
   coast US due to other commitments

   nigel: Are there any events that we would need to avoid?

   pal: We could do it around NAB (April 11-16) in Las Vegas.

   group: concludes that a west coast US location just before or
   after NAB is the most promising option.

   <inserted> tmichel: I would largely prefer before NAB, not

Action Items


   <trackbot> action-355 -- Glenn Adams to Resolve duplication
   between issue-357 and issue-229 -- due 2014-12-04 --


      [9] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/355

   close action-355

   <trackbot> Closed action-355.


   <trackbot> action-362 -- Glenn Adams to Raise an issue for
   font-kerning in ttml2 -- due 2014-12-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW


     [10] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/362

   glenn: The requirement for font kerning came from Japan. This
   was raised as Issue-359.

   close action-362

   <trackbot> Closed action-362.


   <trackbot> action-358 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Draft
   response to itu-r liaison re imsc 1 questions. -- due
   2014-12-11 -- OPEN


     [11] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/358

   nigel: Thanks Pierre for drafting this and including a response
   to the ITU-R question on IMSC1 and WebVTT.

   pal: ITU-R Working Party 6B came back to us with a set of
   specific questions. The liaison response
   ... tries to answer them factually.



     [12] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-tt/2015Jan/0000.html

   pal: The first question asks about the relationship between
   IMSC 1 and WebVTT.
   ... The second question was about progressivelyDecodable and
   its possible usage.
   ... The third question was about support for high frame rate

   glenn: I would edit the last sentence on that to begin with
   'if' so that it doesn't get missed.

   pal: I'll edit it now.
   ... Point 4 is about text profile and image profile and why
   they are mutually exclusive.
   ... I'll post the revised document.

   nigel: I'll take it from there and post the response.

   close action-358

   <trackbot> Closed action-358.

   <scribe> ACTION: nigel Format and send ITU-R liaison response
   [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-363 - Format and send itu-r liaison
   response [on Nigel Megitt - due 2015-01-15].


   <trackbot> action-360 -- Nigel Megitt to Send liaison request
   on behalf of w3c ttwg to arib -- due 2014-12-18 -- OPEN


     [14] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/360

   nigel: I've been held up on this partly due to the holidays but
   also because they want a piece of
   ... paper to arrive, with W3C branding and my signature on it -
   I'll follow up with Daniel from
   ... W3 staff on this to see how we can complete this action.



   <trackbot> issue-360 -- Use of content encoding -- raised


     [15] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/360

   glenn: I would suggest we recommend gzip encoding for transfers
   if the client supports it.

   jdsmith: Is this for data compression?

   glenn: yes

   nigel: We don't really mention transfer at all at the moment.

   glenn: We do have a section on concrete encoding - I thought
   this could go in the same place.

   reopen issue-360

   <trackbot> Re-opened issue-360.


   <trackbot> issue-361 -- Add ttm:mediaTimestamp (or equivalent)
   attribute. -- raised


     [16] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/361

   glenn: In HLS there's a way to specify a timestamp map to
   associate MPEG-2 presentation stamps
   ... with document times. I welcome feedback on this one.
   ... I thought we could add a ttm: metadata attribute.
   ... If it's a bad idea I wouldn't mind dropping it.

   nigel: I know that this is likely to be a problem that needs
   solving, and people working on it,
   ... but I'm not sure when we'll have the solution for it.

   glenn: We can open this issue and possibly add an extension
   spec for something like this.

   nigel: Doing that as a Rec would need a new Charter but we
   could certainly do it as a Note.
   ... I suggest we open this and defer until those folk putting
   TTML into MPEG-2 can define
   ... the problem space better.

   glenn: I'd like to associate this with TTML2 for now and
   possibly move to v.next as part of a
   ... deferral process.

   reopen issue-361

   <trackbot> Re-opened issue-361.


   <trackbot> issue-362 -- Handling forward interoperability of
   attribute extensions in TT namespaces. -- raised


     [17] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/362

   glenn: In TTML1 under the definition of an abstract document
   instance there's some language
   ... about what constitutes a valid abstract document. It
   handles new vocab that is unknown to
   ... the processor that is in one of the TT namespaces, like
   TTML2 adding a new element. But the
   ... language didn't handle attributes in TTML namespaces, e.g.
   a new style attribute like
   ... fontKerning. The language in TTML1 under that would not
   correctly address it but I think the
   ... intent was to do that.

   reopen issue-362

   <trackbot> Re-opened issue-362.


   <trackbot> issue-363 -- Add support for font shear -- pending


     [18] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/363

   glenn: This one came from an industry standard called Lambda
   Cap. I've already moved that to
   ... Pending Review by the way, having implemented it.

   nigel: I'd encourage review of the solution.


   <trackbot> issue-364 -- Relax constraint between the extents of
   the root container and the dimensions of the related video
   object frame -- raised


     [19] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/364

   pal: This was my attempt to capture Simon Hailes comment and
   resolve it, based on my
   ... discussions with him and others. My next step would be to
   implement in the IMSC 1 ED.

   glenn: We should coordinate on that because I'm drafting some
   new language based on mapping
   ... to the related media object's viewport from the document's

   pal: Okay. In a nutshell IMSC 1 currently forces the author to
   specify a root container extent
   ... size in pixels when images are present, and forces that
   extent to be the same as the related
   ... media object. The feedback is that this prevents usage of
   one document with multiple
   ... resolutions of related video objects. The proposal is to
   remove the constraint. It forces the
   ... renderer to be able to scale PNGs to match the related
   video object.

   glenn: It forces renderers to be able to scale the composited
   root container region content into
   ... the related video object as opposed to scaling the
   individual images.

   pal: You said it better!
   ... The feedback I've received is that this is a good idea in
   the multi-resolution world. I intend
   ... to implement it.

   reopen issue-364

   <trackbot> Re-opened issue-364.

   jdsmith: So this affects IMSC only and not TTML in a broader

   pal: Yes, because image is a SMPTE-TT extension. It affects
   IMSC 1 image profile documents but
   ... not other profiles.

   glenn: The general issue is certainly going to be present in
   TTML2 because it will have image
   ... support. The general issue of mapping the root container
   region into some final region
   ... associated with the related video extent does apply to
   TTML1 too.

   nigel: Looking at the remaining issues, did we resolve the
   ttm:item points?

   glenn: I implemented the namespace resolution for ttm:item
   values in TTML2.

   tai: I think we can go ahead with this from my perspective.
   ... I think a way out of this is to avoid listing predefined
   names or items but list the concepts
   ... that may be included.

   glenn: I know that Pierre had that concern about not including
   smpte namespace metadata items.
   ... I have already added an editorial note on the CEA608/708
   metadata items. It's not my
   ... intent to diverge from the existing syntax.

   pal: It's hard to have a final opinion if the intent is to
   provide further information. The decision
   ... is on us to go ahead with a FPWD with incomplete
   information. I'm open minded about this.

   glenn: There are other parts of the spec that are incomplete
   too, but that's okay for a FPWD.

   nigel: I don't hear any objections to closing the ttm:item
   issues so I'll go ahead after this meeting
   ... and do that by email.
   ... Thanks everyone, we're 7 minutes over so I'll adjourn the
   meeting - meet at the usual time next week, for 1 hour.

   group: wishes each other a Happy New Year.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: nigel Format and send ITU-R liaison response
   [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [21]scribe.perl version
    1.140 ([22]CVS log)
    $Date: 2015-01-08 16:25:13 $

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

     [22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Thursday, 8 January 2015 16:37:24 UTC