Re: Agenda items re: CR exit criteria

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 5:45 PM, Cyril Concolato <cconcolato@netflix.com>
wrote:

> Thanks Pierre. Some comments below.
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Cyril,
>>
>> > Do you have precise aspects for which you want careful review?
>>
>> Yes:
>>
>> - finalize the TTML1 3ED exit criteria tests [1]
>>
> The PR seems to be approved by Nigel. There is a comment by Glenn but thee
> does not seem to be objection. Can we merge it? Or are you expecting
> something else?
>
>
>> - identify and resolve gaps in the TTML1 3ED implementation report [6]
>>
> I see 2 concerns:
> - The fact that TTPE and ttval columns are empty
> - the fact that the font size tests are not passing
> Any other concern? What do you suggest?
>
>
>
>> - review the definitions of "strictly pass" and "fully pass" at [2] in
>> the context of the TTML2 exit criteria
>>
> What exactly do you mean? Would you prefer having just pass or fail, no
> intermediate value?
>

I think it isn't necessary to discuss this, since we are not relying on any
of the 'S' passes to satisfy the exit criteria.


>
>
>> - finalize the TTML2 exit criteria tests [ed.: [3] provides a list for
>> validation tests. I do not see a comparable list for presentation tests,
>> and two of the presentation tests are at [4] while the others are
>> presumably at [5].]
>>
> I'm not sure I get it. Are you requesting a JSON file for the presentation
> tests?
>

I will create a tests.json that can be used for a manifest for the
presentation tests. All of the presentation tests for TTML2 are in [5],
there are none in [4].


>
>
>> - identify and resolve gaps in the TTML2 implementation report
>>
> Can you elaborate? Are you concerned about the features that currently
> don't fulfill the exit criteria? Or is it more than that? Any suggestion?
>

I believe we only need to discuss https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/990.
The other remaining non-green features for presentation will be satisfied
by TTPE before Sep 26.


>
>
>> - review the IMSC 1.1 implementation report [7]
>>
>  It seems pretty straight-forward. Do you foresee any problem with that?
>
> Cyril
>
>
>
>> [1] https://github.com/w3c/ttml1/pull/361
>> [2] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2-tests/blob/master/README.md
>> [3] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2-tests/blob/master/validation/tests.json
>> [4] https://github.com/w3c/imsc-tests/pull/67
>> [5] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2-tests/tree/master/presentation
>> [6] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TTML1-3ED_implementation_report
>> [7] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/IMSC1_1_Implementation_Report
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> -- Pierre
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 4:03 PM Cyril Concolato <cconcolato@netflix.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pierre,
>>>
>>> Do you have precise aspects for which you want careful review?
>>>
>>> Cyril
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:24 PM Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Good morning/evening,
>>>>
>>>> Although already included in the agenda, I recommend we carefully
>>>> review the exit criteria and test suites for the following documents:
>>>>
>>>> - TTML1 3ED
>>>> - TTML 2
>>>> - IMSC 1.1
>>>>
>>>> Time is running short to make course corrections.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> -- Pierre
>>>>
>>>