- From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:46:21 +0000
- To: "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <D6EC02AC.59201%nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Thanks all for attending today's TTWG meeting. Minutes can be found in HTML format at https://www.w3.org/2018/04/05-tt-minutes.html
We made one resolution of particular note:
RESOLUTION: When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as Superseded
The review period for this resolution under our Decision Policy ends on 19th April.
Please note that due to expected lack of attendees next week's call is cancelled; the next regular call will be on 19th April.
In text format:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
05 Apr 2018
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] https://www.w3.org/2018/04/05-tt-irc
Attendees
Present
Pierre, Nigel, Philippe, Thierry, Glenn
Regrets
Andreas, Cyril
Chair
Nigel
Scribe
nigel
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]This meeting
2. [5]TTWG Charter
3. [6]TTML1 3rd edition CR
4. [7]IMSC 1.1
5. [8]TTML2
6. [9]Remove @condition from animation, head, layout,
resources, and styling elements. ttml2#704
7. [10]Animate @calcMode value displace{,d} should read
paced. ttml2#699
8. [11]Prioritise loaded fonts when selecting font.
ttml2#675
9. [12]IMSC vNext Requirements
10. [13]IMSC v1.0.1 Rec obsoleting IMSC v1?
11. [14]WebVTT
12. [15]Meeting close
* [16]Summary of Action Items
* [17]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<scribe> scribe: nigel
<cyril> regrets from me
This meeting
Nigel: Today we have TTWG Charter, TTML1 3rd Ed CR, a couple of
issues on TTML2,
... request to transition IMSC 1.1 to CR, and I think Dave
Singer sent something to say he
... wanted to record the resolution to publish WebVTT as CR
today.
... Anything else for the agenda?
Thierry: The different version of IMSC 1.0.1 CR + PR plus IMSC
1.1 FPWD were fixed in place
... to have the correct W3C Document licence.
Nigel: Thank you!
<tmichel> [1] IMSC 1.0.1 CR
[18]https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/CR-ttml-imsc1.0.1-20170713/
[1] http://www.w3.org/
[18] https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/CR-ttml-imsc1.0.1-20170713/
<tmichel> [2] IMSC 1.0.1 PR
[19]https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/PR-ttml-imsc1.0.1-20180227/
[2] https://www.w3.org/2018/04/05-tt-irc
[19] https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/PR-ttml-imsc1.0.1-20180227/
<tmichel> [2] IMSC 1.1 FPWD
[20]https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-ttml-imsc1.1-20171017/
[2] https://www.w3.org/2018/04/05-tt-irc
[20] https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-ttml-imsc1.1-20171017/
Pierre: There's a pull request on respec.js to fix that bug
waiting for your approval Philippe.
group: [nothing else for the agenda]
TTWG Charter
Nigel: I just received an email from Coralie notifying AC and
Chairs that the TTWG charter
... has been extended by 2 months until 31 May 2018.
TTML1 3rd edition CR
Nigel: I think the SOTD has been updated.
Pierre: The CR branch is ready to go modulo an update to the
publication date.
<tmichel>
[21]https://rawgit.com/w3c/ttml1/TTML1-3ED-CR1-build/index.html
[21] https://rawgit.com/w3c/ttml1/TTML1-3ED-CR1-build/index.html
Pierre: You can use the head of that branch or I can generate
it for whoever needs it.
Nigel: What do we do next to close this off? We made the
transition request already, and
... have made the change to the SOTD.
Philippe: You want to proceed to CR before the tests have been
written?
Nigel: Yes
Philippe: Then you should reply to the last email to say
exactly that.
Nigel: I will do that.
... If he says "yes" then when would the exit date be?
Philippe: If he says yes, you've passed the review period so
the document could be published
... on Tuesday.
Thierry: Looking at the SOTD we have added that we need two
implementations and have
... linked to the implementation report. Should we emphasise
focus only on testing what
... we have added in that edition? The statement seems unclear
to me, maybe that the
... implementation will address only the changes made in this
edition report.
Pierre: The changes are already listed.
Thierry: I want to emphasise that the focus is restricted.
... Add something like the implementation report will be
restricted only to the changes
... introduced in the 3rd edition.
Pierre: Sure, I can write that up.
... I'll do that as soon as possible.
Nigel: If we publish on Tuesday then when is the earliest exit
date?
Thierry: We should have at least a month, so May 15th, say.
Philippe: May 29 for the PR, if you send the transition request
on May 22. So deadline for
<plh>
[22]https://w3c.github.io/spec-releases/milestones/?cr=2018-04-
17
[22] https://w3c.github.io/spec-releases/milestones/?cr=2018-04-17
Philippe: comments would be May 15.
Nigel: Great, so May 15 is the date to put in the SOTD, thank
you.
... Pierre, when you tell me that's fixed in the SOTD then I'll
respond re the transition request.
IMSC 1.1
Nigel: We already made a resolution to request transition to
CR:
[23]Resolution to request transition to CR
[23] https://www.w3.org/2018/03/22-tt-minutes.html#resolution01
Nigel: That resolution requires us to have resolved the issues
open at that time.
... Have they been resolved?
Pierre: All the issues outstanding at that point have been
closed and resolved.
... There are 3 issues outstanding on IMSC 1.1. Two are purely
editorial and can be safely
... deferred to post-CR, and are related, making a table easier
to read.
... There's another issue I found yesterday, and I suspect
there will be more. The question
... is do we publish a new WD today or a CR today? I think
publishing a CR is a much
... clearer indication of the state of the document so I'd
rather go with that and a second CR.
... I'd still recommend proceeding with a CR1.
Nigel: Can we fix the issue in the next week or so?
Pierre: Probably. It's implementation experience.
Nigel: How substantive is it?
Pierre: Pretty minor, but substantive.
[24]tts:position should be allowed on region only imsc#366
[24] https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/366
Pierre: I don't expect the scope of IMSC 1.1 to change, or
major features to be added or removed.
Nigel: Seems like the thing to do is to move to CR on the basis
of the resolution we already made.
... Any other views?
Glenn: No objection.
Nigel: In that case I'm going to declare that we have consensus
to request transition.
... Thierry, please could you prepare the transition request?
Thierry: Okay.
Nigel: Anything else on IMSC?
Pierre: No, but I'm waiting for respec to be fixed so I can
update the document licence.
TTML2
Nigel: We have 3 issues and pull requests marked as Agenda.
Remove @condition from animation, head, layout, resources, and
styling elements. ttml2#704
github: [25]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/704
[25] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/704
Nigel: The question here is if there is any use case or
requirement for conditionalising the
... tt element itself? I think Glenn and I agree that it is not
needed. I just wanted to check if
... there are any other views.
Glenn: Note that condition is still permitted on the body
element, so some of the possible
... use cases for conditionalising tt are still possible using
that..
Nigel: Just to check, if we put condition on body does that
imply that there can be more than
... one body element, and that one must be selected prior to
validation? How would that work with an XSD validator?
Glenn: No, there would only be one, and it could merely be
excluded or included.
Nigel: Oh I see, harsh, but that works!
Glenn: Can I mark this as discussed and agreed?
Nigel: I think so, yes.
SUMMARY: WG agrees to implement this issue, noting that body
element can still be conditionally excluded.
Nigel: I will approve the pull request then.
Animate @calcMode value displace{,d} should read paced. ttml2#699
github: [26]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/699
[26] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/699
Glenn: Apparently we had a discrepancy between the schema and
the spec in regard to the
... "paced" value of the calcmode. There was incorrect and
incomplete schema support that
... wasn't mentioned in the spec. There was never any
discussion or proposal to exclude it
... so my conclusion was that it was not intended to be
excluded and it needs to be fixed
... in the schema and added to the spec.
... If it turns out there are insufficient implementations then
we could remove it.
... I plan to add a pull request to make the animation features
more functionally oriented
... than syntactically oriented. We need one targeting paced
and spline modes. That leaves
... two other modes, linear and discrete. Linear is the
default, discrete turns it into the same
... as set semantics with multiple entries.
... If you're going to support animate at all you should
definitely support linear mode, and
... there's no harm in requiring support for discrete at all
since we already have it via set.
... My thinking is that the default feature identifier should
translate to mandatory support
... for linear and discrete, however the other two, paced and
spline add a fair amount of
... additional complexity and attributes so I think they should
have their own feature designators.
... Key times is required by both, and key splines by spline
mode only. I plan to open another
... pull request to orient along those latter two.
Nigel: You said non-discussion implied not excluding, but you
could just as well say that
... non-discussion meant non-inclusion.
Glenn: It looks like an accidental exclusion not an intentional
one.
Nigel: I think we only reviewed the spec in front of us. But
let's not dwell on it.
... Anyhow does anyone have any views about introducing paced?
It seems like good functionality to me.
group: [no further views]
Glenn: Does anyone object to adding the feature designators for
paced and spline?
Nigel: Seems like a good idea to me.
group: [no objections]
Glenn: I've already implemented validation.
RESOLUTION: Add paced calcmode and feature designators for
paced and spline calcmodes.
Prioritise loaded fonts when selecting font. ttml2#675
github: [27]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/675
[27] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/675
Glenn: I would be happy to add normative language that
documents the semantics that I
... think we want to enforce, which is that the entirety of a
font resource, downloaded or not,
... must be available at presentation time to be used or hold
that it exists for the purpose of use,
... in terms of evaluating a list of font families that are
specified by the author in the fontFamily
... property. Right now XSL and TTML say nothing about what
should be done by an
... implementation in terms of loading either locally or
remotely available fonts and use
... during the presentation but there is a presentation I think
by the authors and implementers
... that if you are going to use a font then it had better be
available, or you should move on
... down the list. Right now that behaviour is implementation
defined because it is not defined
... in XSL and not really in CSS either.
... The CSS language may have some relevance to incremental
redisplay or relayout in browsers.
Nigel: I think that's bypassing the issue though, what happens
if the font becomes available
... part way through the presentation?
Glenn: That's implementation dependent.
... Right now there's no backup from the spec. If eventually
every implementation uses
... lazy loading, then maybe we could say something in the
future about it, but I still think
... it is in the domain of implementation choices and goes down
into the details we should
... not be talking about in my opinion. There are a lot of
other ways to optimise implementation
... without spec support, for example rendering text to pixels
prior to its use.
Nigel: Okay, any other views about this? I think it could
impact CSS based renderers like imsc.js.
Pierre: I haven't looked at this at all. Today imsc.js just
copied tts:fontFamily to the CSS
... style and lets the CSS implementation do whatever it does.
I don't see that changing.
... I've not run into this issue and noone has complained about
it so far. My inclination would
... be to leave it as an implementation detail until somebody
runs into a problem.
... One option would be to do nothing now but if it comes up
then come back to this issue.
Glenn: We can always close it and mark as ttml.next for
posterity.
SUMMARY: Take no action for now, mark as ttml.next and close.
github-bot, end topic
IMSC vNext Requirements
Pierre: There's one pull request awaiting your review...
Nigel: Okay I'll look at it.
... Thank you!
Pierre: Similarly #16
Nigel: Ah yes, you're answer
[28]https://github.com/w3c/imsc-vnext-reqs/pull/16#discussion_r
179027816 seems reasonable.
[28] https://github.com/w3c/imsc-vnext-reqs/pull/16#discussion_r179027816
Pierre: Okay I'll make a clarification change.
... I went back and looked at the Netflix submission on
Japanese required features.
... It said only rubyReserve="auto" was required. It seems that
this was never really implemented
... in the requirements, so I've asked Cyril to review it. The
impact is that at some point
... down the line for IMSC 1.1 we may want to constrain that
feature. I don't see that as a
... major issue.
Nigel: There are two ways it could go: either nobody uses the
other values, so there's no
... problem applying the constraint, or other values are used,
in which case we should not
... impose the additional constraint.
Pierre: To Cyril's point, the risk is that in order to support
rubyReserve="auto" you already
... have to support two of the underlying key words.
... Anyway I'm waiting for Cyril's opinion on that.
Nigel: Is that all on IMSC vNext reqs?
IMSC v1.0.1 Rec obsoleting IMSC v1?
Pierre: We have to decide as a group if when v1.0.1 becomes a
Rec we obsolete IMSC 1.
... It makes it easier for the W3 team to implement the
obsoletion if it is part of the Rec
... transition.
... My recommendation is, because IMSC 1.0.1 is completely
compatible with IMSC 1 by design
... and clarifies some IMSC 1 ambiguities then we should
obsolete IMSC 1.
PROPOSAL: When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as
Obsolete
Glenn: Question: I think Superceded is an option as well as
Obsoleted. Which do you plan to use?
Thierry: Superceded is replacement of a spec by another, so
that's probably the one we should use.
... Obsolete is a spec you don't want people to implement any
more.
Nigel: Sounds like Superceded is for us here.
Pierre: Yes I like that better.
PROPOSAL: When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as
Superseded
Glenn: I think that's what was meant in the first place.
Pierre: I'm reading the Process document...
... I don't think we want anyone to implement IMSC 1 at this
point. I think I'd always say
... always use IMSC 1.0.1
Glenn: That means it's superseded. Obsolete means we don't have
a substitute for it.
Nigel: The Process says "A Superseded Recommendation is a
specification that has been replaced by a newer version that
the W3C recommends for new adoption. "
[29]W3C Recommendation description in the Process
[29] https://www.w3.org/2018/Process-20180201/#RecsW3C
RESOLUTION: When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as
Superseded
Nigel: The WBS for IMSC 1.0.1 has closed, with no votes
against. When can we expect a
... transition to Rec to be requested by the Director?
Thierry: I will have to check.
WebVTT
Pierre: Can you share with the WG for the record, as Chair,
what the plan is for CR transition? The folks at Movielabs want
to know.
Nigel: I'm going to duck that - the Chairing responsibilities
split that we have agreed is that
... Dave Singer looks after WebVTT and I look after the
TTML-based work, so I can't and don't want
... to speak for him.
Thierry: Are you referring to the pull request about the
relation between the CG and the WG?
Pierre: Yes.
Thierry: That statement has been there for years, I have not
changed it.
Pierre: I don't dispute that, I'm paying attention now because
it's getting to CR.
Nigel: My expectation was that Dave would join today to record
the resolution to transition to CR.
Thierry: I guess the deadline for publication has been extended
along with the Charter, so
... there's a little bit more time.
... The Charter is under review by W3M and then will go to AC.
There's a bit of time there.
... The Charter incorporating or not incorporating WebVTT
should be the final version
... submitted to the AC.
Nigel: Ah, I see, that makes sense. If hypothetically we
thought that WebVTT is not going
... to be in the next Charter then publishing as a CR would
seem perverse, since there would
... be no route out of CR.
Meeting close
Nigel: Next week, I'm on vacation, so unable to Chair. If
someone wants to Chair (including
... a Chair of course) then please go ahead.
Pierre: Regrets from me too.
Nigel: Andreas has also sent his regrets.
... Given 3 absentees I think we should cancel next week's
meeting, so our next call
... will be on 19th April.
... We haven't much time to decide on a f2f - the proposal is
to meet in advance of the IRT
... subtitle symposium on 22nd and 23rd May.
Pierre: I would be reluctant to attend.
Glenn: I also would not be able to attend.
Nigel: Okay then it doesn't make any sense to go ahead with
that.
Pierre: I'll be in Berlin w/c July 9, so if we want a F2F in
Europe that could be a possibility.
... The weekend before or week after maybe.
... Week of June 18 I'd be in Toronto, if that would help.
Nigel: Half way could work, if we had a host.
Pierre: I'm just throwing ideas in.
... Hopefully we won't need to meet in person though, I'm
hopeful we can deal with this
... electronically.
Nigel: Me too.
Pierre: If we want to target July I need to book travel in the
next three weeks.
Nigel: Okay let's come back to this in 2 weeks and see if we
can confirm.
... By the way for TPAC I've filled in the survey as any two
consecutive days, avoiding
... clash with M+E IG, and requesting joint meeting with CSS
WG.
... Thanks everyone, next meeting in 2 weeks. [Adjourns
meeting]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
1. [30]Add paced calcmode and feature designators for paced
and spline calcmodes.
2. [31]When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as
Superseded
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [32]scribe.perl version
1.152 ([33]CVS log)
$Date: 2018/04/05 15:43:23 $
[32] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[33] 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, 5 April 2018 15:46:53 UTC