- From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:32:19 +0000
- To: "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <D80A1546.6C760%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/2018/11/08-tt-minutes.html
In text format:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
08 Nov 2018
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] https://www.w3.org/2018/11/08-tt-irc
Attendees
Present
Nigel, Mike, Glenn, Thierry, Cyril, Andreas, Pierre
Regrets
None
Chair
Nigel
Scribe
nigel
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]This meeting
2. [5]TTML Profile Registry
3. [6]Joint f2f with EBU Timed Text group
4. [7]Timelines for our next year(ish)
5. [8]WebVTT
6. [9]Meeting close
* [10]Summary of Action Items
* [11]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<scribe> scribe: nigel
This meeting
Nigel: For today I see that Pierre suggested we cover future
timelines and f2f meeting
... at the top of the meeting.
Mike: I have 30-45 minutes only.
Nigel: I did want to take a spin through the profiles registry
as well.
... I don't think there are any other main agenda topics.
... But before we go ahead, I'd like to thank everyone for all
the great work to get us
... to Recommendation today for TTML1 3ED, TTML2 and IMSC 1.1
... Congratulations everyone!
... And sticking to the timeline we agreed about a year ago was
fantastic - a really
... impressive achievement.
TTML Profile Registry
Nigel: We have 13 issues and 4 pull requests.
... And Glenn has volunteered to Edit as well as Mike.
Glenn: I have started an edit to prepare a pull request.
... I'm not ready to discuss any of the issues today.
Nigel: OK, any issues or pull requests that anyone does want to
discuss?
Glenn: I'm hoping to wrap up the current issues in the next few
weeks, probably by
... 29th November.
Nigel: I see that on #52 I asked for more detail and you added
it to the issue, thank you.
Glenn: It would be good to review and approve the open pull
requests in the next
... week or so.
Nigel: +1
... Two were open by me, one by Glenn.
Glenn: FYI I will not be available on the Thanksgiving week on
22nd Nov.
Nigel: It seems we are not quite ready to discuss the issues
today, but I'd like to set a
... target of publishing by the end of the year, which means
getting to a finished draft
... for approval by the end of November.
... Does that seem reasonable?
Glenn: I think so
Nigel: Let's aim for that then.
Mike: Is the document still discoverable?
[12]duckduckgo search results
[12] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ttml+profile+registry
Nigel: I see that the profile registry hits the top three spots
on duckduckgo, so yes.
Joint f2f with EBU Timed Text group
Nigel: Thank you everyone who has contributed to working
towards a proposed date
... and location for this.
... I think we've gravitated towards...
Andreas: At TPAC we discussed a joint meeting with the EBU
Timed Text group,
... especially to discuss further progress on adoption of one
of the TTML specs for the
... live subtitling use case, and for that joint meeting we
plan Friday morning Feb 1st,
... from 0830-1230, location EBU in Geneva.
... Because this would of course not be sufficient to justify
travelling and we may have
... other things to discuss, we have also 31st January
available for a TTWG meeting, the
... complete Thursday. Then it depends on member preferences if
we also take some of
... the 30th January as the meeting day for TTWG.
... The minimum I think that would be available for a TTWG
meeting is Thursday complete
... day and Friday morning for the joint meeting with the
possible extension to use part
... of Wednesday.
Nigel: Thank you for that.
... In terms of agenda items, I think we would expect to
discuss future requirements,
... potentially Charter revisions for later in the year, and of
course in the joint meeting,
... adoption of live subtitles as you already mentioned
Andreas.
Pierre: I would be available. I think it's pretty important to
put a January meeting in
... because if we don't have agreement on requirements by
January then we won't have
... any spec updates by year's end.
... It looks like an important set of requirements will be
around live, and a lot of the
... requirements came from Europe, so it seems like a good idea
to have that discussion
... in Europe to make it easier for folks there to join.
Glenn: I'm available on 31st and 1st. The 30th would be tough.
I presume we would
... have the afternoon of Friday 1st?
Andreas: Part of the membership would not be available on
Friday afternoon, and we
... also want EBU Timed Text group meetings to attend, and they
will hopefully attend
... on Friday morning.
Glenn: How about Saturday morning?
Andreas: I don't think that's really an option, let's see.
Nigel: I don't think so.
Pierre: 12 hours of meeting should be sufficient, right?
Glenn: Depends on whether we go into the meeting with new
requirements documents
... that nobody has looked at yet, as opposed to something we
can review before the meeting.
Pierre: My thinking is this can only work if requirements have
been submitted in December
... so the meeting in January is strictly to address any
concerns.
Glenn: Then we have to get on that right away.
Pierre: Yes. Using our experience over the last 12 months, we
need completed requirements
... by end of January, based on initial requirements from
mid-December, at the latest.
... Since we're not looking at major changes, that's probably
realistic.
Glenn: TTML2 2nd Ed?
Pierre: And/or a module on live, however we want to do that.
... You brought up Karaoke too, maybe that's another module or
a 2nd Ed.
... The scope should be a lot narrower than TTML 2020.
Glenn: We do need a requirements document initially.
Andreas: I also would be available the complete week.
... One thing we could do is have a social dinner on Wednesday,
it is always a good
... setting for the next two days, and then use the complete
day of Thursday and Friday
... morning. Remembering Burlingame or the other f2f meetings
we mostly had
... 1.5 day complete meeting time where everybody was there, so
I think that should sufficient.
Nigel: I think we should target 1.5 days and if that's not
enough, then look at why.
Glenn: I'm happy with Andreas's proposal.
Andreas: Important information for those who don't know. At the
same time, and a reason
... why we looked at these days, there will be a Production
Technology Seminar at EBU
... from Tuesday to Thursday, so if you need to join that
seminar that could help
... justify travel. Even if you don't join that, there will be
a lot of people at PTS, and it
... may be very helpful for catching up with someone joining
PTS.
Nigel: That's a good point, and I should declare I may be
involved in a demo at PTS,
... which is still under discussion, but if it goes ahead I'm
not sure what the impact is
... for my availability, on the other hand, it may be an
excellent discussion point feeding
... into our work on live contribution.
Cyril: I'm uncertain for that meeting, most likely I would be
able to join.
Thierry: I think I should be able to join and should be
available on those dates.
Nigel: Let's say this will go ahead unless something comes
along that knocks the plan out.
... We have enough consensus to go ahead with this as a plan.
... Thank you everyone.
Thierry: Apart from that January f2f the only other one we plan
is the next TPAC one,
... for 2019?
Nigel: Yes I think so, most likely.
... It's unusual for us to have more than 2 f2fs per year, in
TTWG.
Timelines for our next year(ish)
Nigel: Following on from that, I think we have consensus to try
to lock down requirements
... for future technical reports in 2019, by the end of
January.
... The implication there is that if additional requirements
come along later then our
... default position would be to defer them until a later
iteration.
... Does that work for everyone? Does anyone want a different
deadline for requirements?
Pierre: I think we should say by the end of January, we should
have solid accepted
... requirements, subject to minor tweaks. I would say we
should set a deadline of
... mid-December to submit initial requirements so that it
gives us a good month and
... a half to discuss and understand them and identify
outstanding issues. Maybe
... Dec 20th or Dec 13th?
Nigel: I would aim for our last meeting of the year, Dec 20th.
Glenn: I would propose a wiki page that people can edit to
create a requirements
... document.
Pierre: What about using Github and having people submit
requirements.
Nigel: I think that would work, but we don't have a repo for
the group, and I think we're
... talking about generic requirements not necessarily tied to
any particular document.
Glenn: In the past I have suggested a group repo for policy
things for the WG.
Nigel: Yes, and others have suggested it.
Glenn: Can we have a tt-requirements repo?
Nigel: I suggest a ttwg repo and add issues with
future-requirements as a label.
Pierre: I would create a tt-reqs repo.
Glenn: That sounds good. And if you want another ttwg repo for
policy stuff that would be good.
Nigel: That works for me, I'm easy either way.
Thierry: Should I create one or two?
Glenn: I suggest two, ttreqs and ttwg
Nigel: I like the dash, tt-reqs
Pierre: I prefer the dash
Thierry: Me too.
Nigel: There's the answer, Thierry, please create w3c/ttwg and
w3c/tt-reqs
Thierry: Okay
Nigel: Back to the timeline, we should have agreement by Feb 1,
by the end of the F2F,
... so not strictly end of January.
... Then we need to partition the requirements into documents,
which will take a couple
... of weeks, and then have a period of spec editing and test
creation.
... I would like to move to a model where we write tests with
spec changes.
Thierry: We also need to consider Charter revision. If we have
new deliverables then
... it could be that we need to update our Charter. I discussed
that with Philippe yesterday
... and he said we should do that before May 2019.
Nigel: Yes, and we discussed that at TPAC and there was general
agreement to make
... a Charter revision targeting May 2019, which would
effectively extend the Charter
... duration from ending at May 2020 as now, to ending at May
2021.
... I think this will be achievable.
Thierry: Yes. We should start working on this probably in
February to get agreement
... by W3M, AC review (4 weeks) etc so we probably need a draft
Charter by end March 2019.
Nigel: Sounds achievable from this distance!
group: [discussion about potential f2f in TPAC 2019 and clashes
with other industry events]
Nigel: In terms of rough timescale, please could you put a
timeline together for us
... Thierry? Aim for FPWDs around April, and Rec around 1 year
from now.
Thierry: Yes I can do that. Why did you pick a year from now,
given we may have a Charter
... that goes beyond that?
Nigel: We haven't formally agreed this but I feel that a
smaller scope and shorter
... deadlines helps drive our behaviour and is more generally
useful to industry at large,
... even if that means another revision a year after that.
... That's my view anyway.
Pierre: [also supports, apologies scribe missed it]
... Thierry, the timeline really helped with our work this
year, it can't be underestimated.
Nigel: +1
Thierry: Thank you for letting me know that you appreciate it.
Pierre: It worked so well that we actually published in
advance, which I never thought I'd say!
Thierry: If that worked well then I'm ready to re-experience
the same policy and make
... that kind of document again.
Nigel: Testing the water, does anyone want us not to be
deadline driven, and to
... wait until we're ready with a defined scope?
Glenn: I think deadline driven is better, and if it doesn't
make the cut then it gets pushed
... out, and that's all.
Nigel: We have a tight timescale for the first part of our
year, and an action for how to
... proceed further.
Pierre: Nigel, if you could highlight the deadlines that would
be helpful.
Nigel: When Thierry has made tt-reqs repo I will create the two
milestones on that repo
... and send an email about them, i.e. 20th Dec for initial
requirements and 1st Feb for
... finalised requirements.
Thierry: I will let you know.
Nigel: Thank you.
WebVTT
Thierry: WebVTT is in CR, been sitting there for some months
now, and I'm not sure
... there has been much activity going on for that spec. A few
weeks ago David Singer
... said that there was a lack of implementation and probably
we could not fulfil the
... exit criteria and therefore he suggested we move the
document to a WG Note, and
... I think some people agreed to that if I remember rightly,
then on top of that Silvia
... said she was aware of implementations in other products
outside of browsers, so
... the question is to evaluate what kind of implementations
they are, polyfills, set top boxes
... etc and evaluate the level of implementation in those
products in order to fulfil
... the exit criteria.
... I want to add that Philippe said (I discussed with him
yesterday) that WebVTT would
... need to demonstrate implementability experience and get out
of CR before the
... re-charter. So that means if WebVTT does not have
sufficient implementation
... experience then it would not make it to the new Charter.
... I need to ask Silvia more about Gary.
Nigel: So you're saying you want to spend some TTWG effort
doing this?
Thierry: Yes, I will try to look at those products and see who
can put effort into a test
... suite and who will report on the implementations.
... That sounds quite difficult. We are now in November so it
is a hard goal to fulfil before
... April.
Andreas: Why should we start something without the activity
present here? As has
... been pointed out several times, David is co-chairing the
activity.
... He made a proposal, but I think it would be useful if he
joins the TTWG telco
... to discuss the next steps. Without doing that it is a bit
hard I think. I'm not sure how
... this is driven by the group, what you are doing Thierry. At
the moment I don't see a
... clear strategy how to proceed one way or the other. It
seems there are two directions
... to take this in and the Chair should be present to guide
this somehow.
group: [discussion off the record]
Glenn: I think the only way we can proceed with this is to take
a sense of the group
... and put a question on the agenda for a near future meeting,
like make a decision on
... whether to stop all work on WebVTT and publish as a Note
and take no further
... action or see if anyone comes out of the woodwork.
Nigel: Okay, thank you, noted.
Andreas: I agree we should not start anything before it is
clear that there is a
... realistic strategy that can be covered by the right
resource in the group.
Thierry: Just to add one more thing, if you look back a year
ago, David had motivated
... going to CR for different reasons, one that we had
fulfilled WR, and the second that
... we could get out of CR quickly because there are a lot of
implementations. Myself,
... I did a small test suite, and tested a lot of browsers, and
my conclusion that I sent
... to Philippe is that less than a third of the functionality
was actually implemented, so
... I was very sceptical about the level of implementation we
can expect. I haven't tested
... for a year, I don't know if the browsers are better. I
think the expectation to exit CR
... was high from David but it hasn't happened since then.
Andreas: You know there are web platform tests for WebVTT,
Apple spent some effort
... doing that, and they're automated so you can see the
coverage for those tests. I will
... find the link.
Thierry: Please could you resend the link?
... Also how complete is the test suite?
Andreas: I will send you the link, yes.
Thierry: Thank you.
Meeting close
Nigel: Apologies I didn't ask for AOB at the head of the
meeting. Is there any?
group: [silence]
Nigel: Okay that's a no. Thank you everyone, we'll meet same
time next week as usual.
... We've hit the end of our agenda! [adjourns meeting]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
David Booth's [13]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([14]CVS log)
$Date: 2018/11/08 16:30:57 $
[13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[14] 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, 8 November 2018 16:32:45 UTC