Re: edited TTWG draft charter, VTT?

Should we bother pushing VTT to CR and then try to get to Rec.? Silvia and I feel fairly lonely on VTT these days. We have a quality spec., but most clients don’t implement regions, and I susoect it’ll take a while for all the detailed spec. work we have done to get reflected in implementations.  The test suite is web-platform based, which means non-browser clients can’t easily use it and prove that they implement features correctly.

Which is a pile of work. And yet VTT quietly works across a broad swatch of services and clients.

I’ve been trying to get off the VTT chairmanship now for several years. Silvia does the editing as a volunteer, it’s not part of her current work duties.

Guys, if we want VTT to go to Rec. we need more teamwork…


> On Mar 26, 2018, at 8:39 , David Ronca <dronca@netflix.com> wrote:
> 
> What is the debate?  
> 
> David
> 
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:21 AM, David Singer <singer@mac.com> wrote:
> I’m in debate with Silvia over the progression of VTT.  Do others have opinions?
> 
> With WhatWG on a firmer footing, much of the original motivation to do a Rec. has evaporated, and at this point looks like a lot of busy work to little reward. Are there people who see it differently?
> 
> > On Mar 23, 2018, at 3:16 , Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have edited the TTWG draft charter with the changes agreed during our TTWG telecon.
> > Please review the draft charter
> >
> > https://w3c.github.io/charter-timed-text/Draft-2018-TTWG-Charter.html
> >
> > Deadline is Monday midnight US coast. I will send the charter on tuesday to W3M for approval, and will request a charter extension.
> >
> > Thierry
> >
> 
> David Singer
> 
> singer@mac.com
> 
> 
> 

David Singer

singer@mac.com

Received on Monday, 26 March 2018 16:46:53 UTC