- From: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:05:30 +0200
- To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
- Cc: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>, Michael Dolan <mike@dolan.tv>, "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
I think that in the past, we have indeed copied files like Schemas from their cms into a document that is then published. The question that I think is worth asking, if we have a public repo under a public product like Git, is why? I think it’s worth asking whether we can tag the stable release, within the repo, and refer to them from a short document (if needed). It has the obvious advantages for the writers of being less work, and for the readers that they easily see what later work has been done (probably involving bug fixes). > On Jun 26, 2017, at 10:16 , Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > > Just to explain my thinking, I see the XML Schema for IMSC as essentially a software product published by the Group alongside the spec for utility. It seems to me that a GitHub repo is the appropriate and most user friendly way to access the source code. By using a release tag we can generate a stable URL easily. > > I'm not against publishing in a more traditional static web page but I think we lose out on flexibility and ability to process issues and make it slightly harder for developers to track and download updates that may be made in the future. > > Nigel > > >> On 26 Jun 2017, at 07:38, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote: >> >> Thank you Glenn, >> This example is exactly what I was speaking about. >> >> Another example in IMSC1 is the errata page (which carries informative info) and is linked from the REC. >> >> The errata page can be updated by the TTWG, when necessary. >> >> Thierry >> >> >> >>> Le 25/06/2017 à 21:52, Glenn Adams a écrit : >>> FYI. The TTML1 schemas are published at >>> >>> * http://www.w3.org/2013/09/ttml1/xsd/schema.zip >>> * http://www.w3.org/2013/09/ttml1/rnc/schema.zip >>> >>> These are not under TR but are still permanent, stable URLs. So I >>> suspect this is what Thierry has in mind. >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux >>> <pal@sandflow.com <mailto:pal@sandflow.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Thierry, >>> >>>> Publishing those XSD in the W3C space (out of TR) is easy. It is a stable URI. It has been used for years. >>> >>> Can you give an example of a resource "in the W3C space (out of TR)"? >>> >>> What is the process for modifying such resources that are referenced >>> in a REC? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> -- Pierre >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org >>> <mailto:tmichel@w3.org>> wrote: >>>> Please let's have a simple process here. >>>> >>>> Publishing those XSD in the W3C space (out of TR) is easy. It is a >>> stable >>>> URI. It has been used for years. >>>> >>>> I prefer this than publishing in Github, which may not be stable >>> and is not >>>> user frendly. >>>> >>>> Thierry >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 24/06/2017 à 18:26, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> Hi Nigel, >>>>> >>>>> It sounds like we are inventing a new process when the WG Note >>> process >>>>> already exists. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> -- Pierre >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Nigel Megitt >>> <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk <mailto:nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 24 Jun 2017, at 17:20, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux >>> <pal@sandflow.com <mailto:pal@sandflow.com>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Nigel, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why the complexity here? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am concerned that modifying the github repo can be done by any >>>>>>> number of folks, including by mistake. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It can; I would suggest tagging a release when we have a known >>> good state >>>>>> (as far as we are aware at that time) and declaring the current >>> operational >>>>>> release tag in a protected master branch readme file. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then any change would only be reflected in a new release by explicit >>>>>> decision, which could be by Group consensus. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nigel >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Revising a WG Note requires group consensus. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am open to other options. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Pierre >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Nigel Megitt >>> <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk <mailto:nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Why the complexity here? Can't we just publish the GitHub repo >>> details >>>>>>>> and host them directly from there? That makes them much easier >>> to use and >>>>>>>> update. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nigel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 24 Jun 2017, at 06:45, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org >>> <mailto:tmichel@w3.org>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>>>> We don't necessarly need to have a WG Note for this. >>>>>>>>> We can publish the current schemas files on the W3C site (out >>> of TR) >>>>>>>>> and that will be good enough. No over burdon. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I propose to host those schemas at >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/IMSC/ttml-imsc1.0.1/xml-schemas/ >>> <https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/IMSC/ttml-imsc1.0.1/xml-schemas/> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and change the link in the spec to this URI. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thierry >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Le 24/06/2017 à 01:04, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux a écrit : >>>>>>>>>> Hi Mike, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> put the schemas in a WG Note now and reference it before >>> publishing >>>>>>>>>>> IMSC1.0.1. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ok with me. I would create a separate directory on the IMSC >>> github >>>>>>>>>> repo to host the WG Note and XSD collection. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Happy to do this by Monday COB, in time for approval on >>> Thursday and >>>>>>>>>> the IMSC1.0.1 CR transition, unless significant concerns are >>> raised. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This switch might not even be substantive since the XSD are >>>>>>>>>> informative in IMSC1. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- Pierre >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Michael Dolan >>> <mike@dolan.tv <mailto:mike@dolan.tv>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Given the apparent process challenges for updating the >>> informative >>>>>>>>>>> schemas >>>>>>>>>>> for IMSC1, I’d like to propose that we do that before >>> publication of >>>>>>>>>>> IMSC1.0.1 – put the schemas in a WG Note now and reference >>> it before >>>>>>>>>>> publishing IMSC1.0.1. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Michael A DOLAN >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> TBT, Inc; PO Box 190 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Del Mar, CA 92014 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1-858-882-7497 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----------------------------- >>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>> ----------------------------- >>> >>> > > > ----------------------------- > 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. > ----------------------------- > Dave Singer singer@mac.com
Received on Monday, 26 June 2017 13:06:19 UTC