- From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 16:07:28 +0000
- To: W3C Public TTWG <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <D3074C0E.373B7%nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Thanks all for attending today's TTWG Meeting. Minutes can be found in HTML at: https://www.w3.org/2016/03/10-tt-minutes.html
In text format:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
10 Mar 2016
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2016/03/10-tt-irc
Attendees
Present
Nigel, Pierre, tmichel, Andreas, Frans, Glenn
Regrets
none
Chair
Nigel
Scribe
Nigel
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]This meeting
2. [5]Action Items
3. [6]Charter
4. [7]IMSC
5. [8]TPAC 2016
6. [9]TTML
* [10]Summary of Action Items
* [11]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<scribe> scribe: Nigel
This meeting
tmichel: I would like to add TPAC to the agenda - we need to
say if we plan to meet at TPAC in Lisbon.
nigel: Today we need to discuss the Charter, the TPAC issue
tmichel just raised, and TTML issues.
... Any other business?
group: No AOB.
Action Items
action-442?
<trackbot> action-442 -- Nigel Megitt to Add an issue to ttml2
for ensuring plain text accessibility -- due 2015-11-05 --
PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot>
[12]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/442
[12] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/442
nigel: I did this, and raised issue #151
[13]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/151
[13] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/151
close action-442
<trackbot> Closed action-442.
action-439?
<trackbot> action-439 -- Andreas Tai to Use of generic font
family name "serif" should be allowed -- due 2015-11-01 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[14]http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/439
[14] http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/439
action-439: [TTWG Meeting 2016-03-10] This is issue #3
[15]https://github.com/w3c/ttml-webvtt-mapping/issues/3 in the
github repo - no point in having it as an action too, so
closing.
[15] https://github.com/w3c/ttml-webvtt-mapping/issues/3
<trackbot> Notes added to action-439 Use of generic font family
name "serif" should be allowed.
close action-439
<trackbot> Closed action-439.
Charter
tmichel: Plh would like to have a charter frozen by Tuesday for
presentation to W3M on Wednesday, so we can
... present to members at the AC meeting at the end of the
month.
... What I did is I updated it with the BBC Pull Request, and
incorporated all the issues that were raised by Pierre.
... I had some discussion with plh so we agreed on that. There
was one remaining around "interoperable".
... W3 Process says we should show at least two independent and
interoperable implementation but I saw that
... on the latest charter template it only shows "independent"
implementation so I was able to remove the wording
... "interoperable" so I hope that satisfies Pierre and the
group.
... The only remaining issue I think is about the licensing. I
put specific wording for the document license for
... TTML and IMSC, and put choice wording for the other
documents for Software or Document License.
... The last point is that I sent an email to David and Simon
and they said that for WebVTT they want to use the
... Software and Document license. Either I specifically say
that or I leave it as it is currently, open, and we can
... choose it later. David and Simon agree I think.
nigel: I am happy to have the charter as vague as it can be
here, so I wonder if we should, despite the consensus
... on document license for TTML and IMSC, leave it open for
everything.
tmichel: You can do that - it's the Chair's decision.
nigel: Okay group, I'm proposing to leave the choice until
later for all documents, is that okay with everyone?
group: no objections
nigel: In that case please could you change it to have the same
wording for everything and we can decide later?
tmichel: Yes, I'll do that after the call.
... The last issue is the PR from Andreas.
Frans: And a minor one from me adding a link to EBU
nigel: Looking at
[16]https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/pull/46 - any reason
we shouldn't add a link to the EBU?
[16] https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/pull/46
group: No reasons stated.
nigel: Okay I think you're safe to merge that one!
... Andreas opened
[17]https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/pull/44 which is a
bit more complex perhaps.
[17] https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/pull/44
atai: I think the issue and the text say the same - there's
under-specification on how TTML is used with the
... texttrack model, and though there's been discussion in the
past there's an ongoing need in the market to
... specify this. It should be done partly in this group and
possibly also in another group that handles HTML5.
... There may be additional syntax or semantics needed in
HTML5.
... Nigel pointed out that we don't know now if it should be a
Note or a Recommendation. I'm happy with either.
nigel: Any other thoughts on if this should be a Recommendation
or a Note?
tmichel: To me it sounds more like a Note, but I don't know
exactly what the content would be.
atai: Do we have to decide now? How do we phrase it best to
allow flexibility?
glenn: I was going to make that point too - we should make the
language vague so we don't have to decide now.
tmichel: If we just say a "Technical Report" that doesn't say
if it's a Note or a Recommendation so that should be fine.
... I don't think there's a guideline that requires Rec track
docs to be listed in the Charter as being Rec track. I'll check
it.
... I've seen documents that were supposed to be Rec but were
published as Note.
nigel: I think that's supported in the Process - groups can
downgrade a Rec to a Note but I'm not sure about the
... other way around.
glenn: I think we should leave it as Technical Report.
nigel: Okay, let's do that, and if tmichel can check that
doesn't block any possibility then that's a way forward.
tmichel: Okay I'll do that. I also wanted to say that plh is
comfortable with this statement.
nigel: So to be specific the change relative to the current PR
is to remove the word "(Note)".
tmichel: yes.
nigel: Any other points to raise on this PR?
atai: I just have a question - will tmichel make the change?
tmichel: I'll do it.
atai: Thank you.
nigel: Great, sounds like there's nothing more to discuss on
that PR. Can we revisit the issue on Interoperable, which is
still open?
... Pierre are you happy to close the issue?
pal: Yes, absolutely.
nigel: [adds note] - I can't close the issue.
tmichel: Pierre or I can close it probably.
pal: Unfortunately I can't.
tmichel: I'll close it then.
pal: Oh yeah, I can actually. [closes issue]
... As an aside it would be good to have a label per charter so
that issues could be labelled against the charter they apply
to.
tmichel: That's true!
nigel: Okay, we have no remaining issues and agreement on all
the pull requests. Any last points on the charter?
tmichel: The end date is curious - 30th March: I'd have made it
31st.
nigel: Go ahead!
... In that case once tmichel has made today's changes we have
a version for plh to take to W3M. Thanks all!
IMSC
nigel: I just wanted to note, with thanks to all, that we have
a Proposed Rec, at:
[18]https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/PR-ttml-imsc1-20160308/
[18] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/PR-ttml-imsc1-20160308/
nigel: Well done all!
tmichel: It would be nice if everyone could ping their AC rep
to answer the review WBS to get as much response as possible.
... You could also encourage people from other W3C member
companies to respond.
... Plh has pinged Karen regarding a possible press release or
blog. We have to prepare that to be ready for Rec.
pal: The next step is Karen will get back to us on some ideas
and I'm happy to draft something if needed.
... We're waiting for a response from Karen [who is away right
now]
TPAC 2016
tmichel: For TPAC there are some questions:
... 1. Do we want to attend TPAC in Lisbon in September?
... 2. If yes, which days do we want to meet? Same format as
usual, Mon/Tue/Thu/Fri for WG meetings, Wed for Plenary.
... 3. What groups do we want to meet with?
... We have to complete the form by April 15.
pal: Looking at my calendar it would be great to meet early in
the week if possible.
tmichel: Mon 19/Tue 20?
pal: That'd be ideal for me.
nigel: My thought is that we will say yes, so I'll fill in the
form to say that.
... Now we will have a charter point on TTML/HTML we may have a
stronger drive to meet an HTML group.
atai: We should find out which is the right group - could be
Web Apps.
... I'm not sure if we need a group meeting, but it's good to
have a close relationship with the Web & TV IG.
glenn: I agree with Mon & Tue 2 days.
atai: That would work fine for me too.
tmichel: Me too.
nigel: And me.
... If people could let me know what groups they may want to
meet or avoid clashing with then I'll add them to the form.
... The sooner the better please.
atai: If tmichel could advise on the right HTML group that
would be helpful. I think it's web platform group?
tmichel: That's the right group.
nigel: The draft charter has us working in two subgroups, so I
wonder if there's an expectation on all subgroups
... meeting within a single TTWG slot or if they are treated as
separate meetings.
tmichel: This year CGs are also allowed to meet - we could
consider the TTCG!
nigel: We should invite them to join us.
glenn: If they do want to meet then we should, yes.
TTML
tmichel: There is a publication blackout during the AC week,
but we can use the automated publication feature,
... if Glenn agrees, with my help.
glenn: I'm trying to wrap it up in the next day or so. When
does the moratorium start?
tmichel: Starts on 19th March, until 24th.
glenn: I'm confident I'll have it available early next week at
the latest.
tmichel: If we want to use the regular procedure we could
publish on 17th, meaning we must provide a draft to
... the webmaster by Tuesday 15th.
glenn: That was my original schedule, so I'm still trying to
make that.
... If I don't then I'll investigate with tmichel what it would
take to do the automated publishing.
... Also come to think of it there's this new style mechanism
that needs to be put in place, right?
tmichel: Actually what you put in is a new script that
generates the Toc.
glenn: Also I would have to implement that, which I don't have
in my schedule.
tmichel: Let me investigate with the XMLSpec tool if there are
some guidelines how to use it with the new style.
nigel: Do we need a group decision?
tmichel: Yes but it's not a full transition so we don't need
everyone to approve.
group: [discussion re process and approvals]
pal: Can we have a week to review?
glenn: I don't plan to make any further changes.
tmichel: Can we review by Monday or Tuesday?
nigel: I'd like the PR I've had open for a while to be merged
in please?
glenn: Okay I'll give that a shot.
nigel: Thanks.
... Any objections to reviewing within that timescale
(Monday/Tuesday next week) and if there are no objections then
publish as a new WD?
group: No objections.
nigel: For me that's a Decision!
... Looking at issue #150
[19]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/150 I just want to note
that there's been a bit of offline discussion with me and
Glenn.
[19] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/150
atai: I mentioned in an email that I think this is an important
issue and I'd like to spend some time discussing it,
... perhaps next week. Even if we only agree the impact.
pal: What seems at first to be a bug may be a preference. I
think it'd be really good to make sure we have all the
... information and pick the right solution. At first it looked
really simple but it seems a lot trickier.
nigel: I agree - that's why the proposed solutions so far have
involved signalling in the document, since it is
... unclear if some use cases actually prefer the gaps to
exist. It would be much easier if we could just mandate
... a single behaviour but I don't think we know enough to do
that.
atai: I'd also note that this has been discussed in EBU - I
think the right place to come up with any solution is
definitely this group.
nigel: Okay, we're out of time for today, thanks very much
everyone [adjourns meeting]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [20]scribe.perl version
1.144 ([21]CVS log)
$Date: 2016/03/10 16:06:32 $
[20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
----------------------------
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.
---------------------
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2016 16:07:55 UTC