- From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 16:20:57 +0000
- To: Timed Text Working Group <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <5941EAB8802D6745A7D363D7B37BD1F7AD967783@bgb01xud1012>
Thanks all for attending today's TTWG meeting. Apologies if my comms about the start time were not clear enough. If it helps, I always add a timeanddate URL for every meeting that you can use to display the meeting time in your time zone.
Minutes for today's meeting can be found in HTML format at https://www.w3.org/2019/04/04-tt-minutes.html
In text format:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
04 Apr 2019
[2]Agenda
[2] https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/31
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] https://www.w3.org/2019/04/04-tt-irc
Attendees
Present
Gary, Thierry, Nigel, Pierre, Glenn
Regrets
Cyril, Andreas
Chair
Nigel
Scribe
nigel
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]This meeting
2. [6]Bugzilla
3. [7]Mercurial
4. [8]CVS
5. [9]WebVTT Implementation report and CR update
6. [10]TTWG Charter
7. [11]TTML Profile Registry
8. [12]September F2F meeting
9. [13]TTML3
10. [14]Add module framework
11. [15]Specify fixed, implied semantics for xlink:type
and xlink:actuate (#1039). ttml2#1050
12. [16]Prevent font element from overriding generic font
family (#1042). ttml2#1049
13. [17]Meeting close
* [18]Summary of Action Items
* [19]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<scribe> scribe: nigel
This meeting
Nigel: We have possible regrets from Cyril.
... For today, [iterates through agenda]. Any particular points
to make sure we cover, or other business?
Thierry: No.
Gary: No.
Nigel: Okay let's get going.
... In the light of the low attendance (maybe people were
confused about the start time today?) let's do
... what we can for now.
Bugzilla
Nigel: This may affect WebVTT?
Gary: Yes, I think most of the bugs have been transferred but
its possible some old things could have
... been forgotten.
Thierry: I just saw the message this morning about Mercurial
and Bugzilla. I know they will be archived
... but I don't know more.
... We have not used it for any TTML based work so this goes
back some time.
Gary: I went to the page and it says its an archived snapshot
so maybe its fine to see stuff that existed
... but not add new things.
... Also the newest bug on VTT there is 2015, so I'm not sure
how relevant it is.
Thierry: I think Silvia handled it.
Nigel: OK unless someone says otherwise, let's assume there's
no action to take.
Mercurial
Nigel: I am 99% sure we transferred all the Mercurial content
to GitHub already. Certainly the
... GitHub ttml1 repo contains what used to be in the TTML
Mercurial repo, since it was created by
... transfer from Mercurial. For example the draft API docs are
in there, and the requirements docs.
... So I don't think there's any work to do there.
Thierry: I can't think of more on the top of my head.
Gary: There is one old draft spec on the TTCG about 608 to VTT
that seems to be on Mercurial that may
... be useful to capture.
<gkatsev>
[20]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/text-tracks/raw-file/default/608toVT
T/608toVTT.html
[20] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/text-tracks/raw-file/default/608toVTT/608toVTT.html
<gkatsev>
[21]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/text-tracks/raw-file/default/608toVT
T/
[21] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/text-tracks/raw-file/default/608toVTT/
Nigel: I see there's a sketch of an authoring guideline.
Gary: We can probably drop that.
... There's also an old version of the region spec.
Nigel: That's all in the WebVTT spec now isn't it?
Gary: Yes, exactly.
Nigel: Is it worth creating a repo for the 608 one?
Gary: We can just grab it and add it to the VTT repo as a
supplement, just to keep it visible.
... I think it's outdated and needs to be updated.
Nigel: OK, do you want to do that?
Gary: Sure!
Nigel: Thank you.
CVS
Nigel: We've not used the decommissioned CVS for anything have
we?
Thierry: No I don't think so. It's different to the CVS for our
W3C site, for example
Nigel: Great, so we don't need to do anything there.
WebVTT Implementation report and CR update
Nigel: On the Implementation Report, any answers to the Netflix
questions about Japanese language support?
Gary: There is support for ruby positioning, ta te chu yoko
(text combine upright) in WebVTT
... because they are permitted CSS, but no browser has
implemented it.
... There is browser support for bouten (text-emphasis in CSS)
but it is not on the whitelist for WebVTT.
... Then slanted text: I'm not sure what is necessary for it,
but it seems potentially possible in CSS with
... tranform(skew) but that is definitely not whitelisted.
... I think Japanese support is important but I don't think it
should hold up getting the current CR
... through into PR, and then the Japanese support can come as
the next thing that I work on.
Nigel: That's clear, thank you.
... Does that mean web platform tests for ruby positioning
fail?
Gary: There are no tests for it at the moment, and it is
something we can potentially add now.
Nigel: I think it makes sense to do that because it is
whitelisted CSS.
... Do you think any implementations might pass that?
Gary: I could likely get it working in vtt.js.
Nigel: I wonder if it might work on iOS.
Gary: Also the cue setting of vertical is sort-of available.
Firefox and Chrome position it wierdly and
... Safari inverts the two vertical options - it's possible
that can be fixed quickly so I will ping Eric and hope
... it does not hold anything up.
Nigel: That's definitely not one of those WebVTT non-intuitive
oddities?
Gary: I'll check but I don't think so.
... Chrome puts it in the middle. Firefox puts it on the
correct side but indented quite a lot, like a quarter
... of the way in from the side.
Nigel: Thanks for that. Moving on to the CR publication.
... I see that we published the CR today.
[22]WebVTT 2nd CR published today
[22] https://www.w3.org/TR/2019/CR-webvtt1-20190404/
Nigel: There are some things that need fixing and can hopefully
be done in-place.
... The Latest Version link takes you to the old one,
[23]https://www.w3.org/TR/webvtt1/
... And I noticed that the changes and diff links are not up to
date, in the SoTD.
[23] https://www.w3.org/TR/webvtt1/
[24]Changes document
[24] https://www.w3.org/TR/webvtt1/changes.html
Nigel: The addition of at risk features is not listed.
Gary: Yes
Nigel: And the diff is the diff to the old version.
Gary: And it doesn't include the at risk piece.
Nigel: Yes
[25]Diff FPWD to CR1
[25] https://www.w3.org/TR/webvtt1/diff.html
Nigel: I don't know why this diff was done in this style, it's
odd. We normally see the HTML diff
... generated by the W3 diff service, which gives nice looking
HTML output.
... It doesn't seem like an Editorial change is needed, can you
please look at it Thierry?
Thierry: I will look into it.
Nigel: There's one other point - the Editor has not been
updated!
... Silvia raised this already, she needs to be moved to the
former Editors list and Gary added as the
... current Editor.
Thierry: As a matter of fact today I updated the publication on
the wiki page - it says Silvia but when
... I saw the published version I left it like that, because
that reflects what it says.
... Sorry Gary!
Gary: It's ok, I was just focused on getting the CR out there.
TTWG Charter
Nigel: Thank you Pierre for preparing a simpler charter draft
for us to work on.
[26]Charter draft pull request #47
[26] https://github.com/w3c/charter-timed-text/pull/47
Nigel: Pierre and I had a bit of discussion offline and I think
you processed my comments before
... opening the pull request?
Pierre: I did one of them, we can go over the other two now.
Nigel: Yes please.
<gkatsev>
[27]https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/w3c/chart
er-timed-text/blob/fc3f5e948afd372cccc7dac647da20ab943bddd7/ind
ex.html
[27] https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/w3c/charter-timed-text/blob/fc3f5e948afd372cccc7dac647da20ab943bddd7/index.html
Pierre: One of your comments was about the sentence present
before that mentioned adopting features
... from other groups like SMPTE, EBU etc.
Nigel: Yes
Pierre: I don't think that's a scope issue, fairly certain it's
not a success criteria issue.
... So I think it's more of a coordination and dependency issue
with other groups.
... I added a sentence under 4.2 instead.
Nigel: It's good to have that in 4.2, but my request to add it
to Scope follows a conversation I had with
... Philippe, in which I was discussing adoption of live
contribution functionality from EBU, and he said
... no member submission, for example, was needed, because it
was clearly in scope of the WG to do this
... based on the Charter.
... I think we may need explicit permission here rather than
relying on implicit acceptance.
Pierre: We should state the work we are going to do rather than
having an obtuse unmeasurable statement.
... If we want to work on live contribution we should add it to
the deliverables.
Nigel: On the obtuse and unmeasurable...
Pierre: it's obtuse in the light of what you just said, before
I just thought it was unmeasurable.
Nigel: Like you say, it's not a success criterion, rather it's
a permission, so yes, it is unmeasurable because
... it doesn't require us to do anything.
... I see that the Scope as drafted here already allows for
prepared and live formats, and the
... Deliverables allows for development of new technical
reports, Rec or non-Rec.
... So I think we're probably covered on that point.
... Any other comments about the freedom and permission to do
new stuff?
group: [no other comments]
Pierre: The next question is why list existing technical
reports?
... I guess there are some weird rules about IP where you have
to list WDs, which the team addresses.
... Take SDP-US, why should the group address that explicitly?
... You pointed out the wiki has that list. I looked at it and
it is not complete.
... If I were reviewing a Charter I think it would be important
to put that list somewhere.
... It's okay for it to be the wiki, my preference would be the
wiki, but the wiki is not complete.
... How do we deal with this?
Nigel: The obvious thing, regardless of the Charter is to
complete the wiki list. Thierry?
Thierry: What is the delta?
Pierre: All the Notes and Recs the WG has produced.
... We can just point to the wiki then from the Charter.
Thierry: Okay, I don't know if that's do-able.
Pierre: The alternative is to list them in the Charter. The
downside is the list may become
... obsolete when new documents are added.
Nigel: Yes
Thierry: That's the drawback with a frozen document like the
Charter.
Pierre: We can delete that then?
Nigel: I think we do need to say we can update or publish new
versions of existing publications, and
... I prefer to point to the list on the wiki
[28]Wiki publication list
[28] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/Publications
Pierre: Just pushing that change right now.
Nigel: The wiki list is pretty good, I'm not sure what's
missing.
Pierre: I found one at least...
... The role registry for example.
Thierry: There's a colour code showing if the spec is done
(green), ongoing (yelllow), notes (blue), abandoned (grey)
... maybe I should highlight it better. Then there's the status
column, Rec/CR/WG Note etc.
Pierre: I pushed that change.
Nigel: Looks good to me, thank you.
Thierry: I will add the role registry.
Nigel: I wonder if the RDF from /TR would help.
[29]/TR RDF file
[29] https://www.w3.org/2002/01/tr-automation/tr.rdf
scribe: It has Notes in but not the publishing WG by the looks
of things.
Thierry: The Role registry is only on the wiki, which is why it
is not there.
<tm> [30]https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText
[30] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText
Thierry: This shows publications including the Role registry in
the wiki. Should I have a link to that wiki page?
Nigel: I would say so.
<tm> [31]https://www.w3.org/wiki/TTML/RoleRegistry
[31] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TTML/RoleRegistry
Pierre: Or turn it into a WG Note, I'm happy either way.
Nigel: The wording "entertainment chain" needs a bit of
wordsmithing, to include any media context
... The only other point I'd make is the scope is restricted to
formats, but should it include APIs, for example?
Pierre: I kept that because it seems core to the existing
scope.
Nigel: I agree the current scope does say formats.
Pierre: To mimic the broader mission we should allow ourselves
to publish other specifications.
... First line would become:
... This group is chartered to develop specifications used for
the representation of timed text in online media.
Nigel: Any objections to that?
...
... Okay, go for it.
Pierre: Alright.
Nigel: I had a question. The current draft charter has, under
Deliverables, "Normative Specifications" and
... "Other Deliverables". Is it important to keep that? The
draft we're working on here replaces them with
... Technical Reports, and Other Deliverables.
Thierry: I don't know what a normative specification is, I know
what a normative section is.
Glenn: That's a good point, specifications aren't normative in
themselves.
... Say Rec track if that's what you mean.
Nigel: We don't even need to do that.
Pierre: I've done another push to fix the scope as discussed.
... On the "entertainment chain" point, we can just remove that
sub-clause...
Nigel: Yes, do that (enthusiastically)!
Pierre: Alright, done.
Nigel: Brilliant. I suggest we merge this and use it as the
basis for a new review.
Pierre: +1
Nigel: Any objections to merging this?
group: [no objections]
Nigel: Okay please merge it.
... Still to do, after our review, is addressing the Chair
section and basis documents for listed
... deliverables, which Philippe tells me are both jobs for W3
staff.
Pierre: I will merge that.
Nigel: Thank you Pierre for your work here!
TTML Profile Registry
Nigel: Unless anyone has anything to discuss here, I think the
only thing is to note that we are half
... way through the Decision review period for publishing a new
version of the Note and addressing
... issue 71 later.
September F2F meeting
Pierre: Tuesday to Thursday is the best I can do at TPAC.
Glenn: Have we signed up to Thursday and Friday?
Nigel: Yes, so far.
... If we scheduled our meeting for Tuesday and Thursday we
would likely clash with AC on both days.
TTML3
Glenn: Pull #30?
Add module framework
github: [32]https://github.com/w3c/ttml3/pull/30
[32] https://github.com/w3c/ttml3/pull/30
Glenn: I don't know what we're waiting on for this.
... We discussed it, and Pierre preferred not to define public
and private, which are gone. I'm just waiting
... for an approval. It's fine to consider backporting this to
TTML2, but I want it wrapped up in TTML3
... first. If it satisfies concerns about new functionality
then that may be something to discuss later.
Pierre: The spec still references private modules.
Glenn: Yes, just in prose, not as a defined term. That was
intentional.
Pierre: I'm happy to file a separate issue on TTML2.
... What I find really hard is not being able to do a diff.
Reviewing the snippets out of context is really hard.
... Any plans to get a diff working?
Glenn: There used to be a W3 diff service. I haven't tried it
for a while, but last year it wasn't working at all
... and the only way I could get a diff was to request Philippe
to do it manually and send me a link, which
... was inefficient. If the service is working then someone has
it working somewhere. I agree with you it
... would be nice to have it working, but it's orthogonal to
this particular issue.
Nigel: This is important for working group effectiveness. We
already build the spec onto a different branch.
... all that is needed is to present it in a useful form.
Thierry, can you follow up with Philippe on this?
Thierry: There have been many requests about the diff tool not
working, but the systems teams has
... not yet resolved that issue.
Nigel: That is part of the problem, but this is broader than
that. The PR-Preview tool can generate diffs,
... but we can't use it here, which is the painful part.
... It's hard to know what more to do.
... Perhaps we can use htmlpreview.github.io
Pierre: I do have a technical question about this pull request.
... Document conformance: How does pruning for conformance work
in the context of modules?
... Section 4 step 1.
... It currently refers to vocabulary in section 5 Vocabulary,
but that's no longer true.
Glenn: The pull request modifies the text in section 4. It
effectively incorporates the language into the
... previous sentence by saying it is defined in terms of a
collection of functional modules.
... It doesn't distinguish between internal and external
modules.
Pierre: The requirement for this to work, profiles of TTML have
to implicitly or explicitly define the
... collection of functional modules that they support.
Glenn: Yes, and right now I think that's how they work, and it
is implicit at this point.
... All of the feature designators in TTML2 for example can be
associated with some internal module,
... in terms of element and attribute definitions.
... Then there's the additional loosey-goosey link between
modules and schemas.
... The language in 4.1 has always been rather general and I
didn't want to make it less general.
... I also wanted to introduce modules and have it cover the
existing functionality as well as new functionality.
... That language is simpler than what was there previously and
works at least in my mind.
Nigel: There's a lot more complexity about relating profiles to
vocabulary which I don't think we can
... really address in 4.1 without getting very verbose. This is
probably as good as we can get.
Pierre: Section 5 is still referenced from 4.2 and 4.3.
Glenn: Is that a barrier to resolving this pull request?
Pierre: It's a copy-paste wouldn't you say, would you be able
to address it?
Glenn: I see what you mean, not just referencing 5 Vocabulary.
... I agree and will make that change before I merge it.
Pierre: Fine with me.
Glenn: Thanks for pointing that out.
Pierre: I'm hunting for every reference to section 5 for
vocabulary.
Glenn: I'll make those changes and merge if there are no
objections.
Nigel: Yes, I've heard no objections, go ahead and do that
please.
... If more issues get raised on the merged text we can address
them later.
Specify fixed, implied semantics for xlink:type and xlink:actuate
(#1039). ttml2#1050
github: [33]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/pull/1050
[33] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/pull/1050
Glenn: The only comment is to ask if there are any tests, and I
don't think we can test it.
Nigel: That's right, so this is a normative change that we
cannot test?
Glenn: That's right, it's an ambiguity being resolved. If it is
possible to demonstrate that an implementation
... ignores this, but how could you test it?
... You could create content but only that implementation could
look at the results and see if they
... satisfy the test. We could create the test without the
sample output.
Nigel: We don't always define the test output as a sample
though?
Glenn: We always do for presentation tests. There's no
validation to be done because it's never specified.
... I think we should go ahead and accept it and we will have
to describe this as a category of substantive
... changes that we cannot test except by reference to
undefined external behaviour.
Nigel: I think that's true, but if we can't test it doesn't
that mean we don't need the change?
Glenn: No it's important to clarify it. In the future we might
define the actuate and type attributes, in which
... case we would have something testable.
Nigel: Can we move on then?
Glenn: Can you add an approval?
Nigel: Yes. Just for the record, any objection to merging this
normative change without a test?
group: [no objection]
RESOLUTION: Merge this pull request
Nigel: I've approved it.
Glenn: Thank you.
Prevent font element from overriding generic font family (#1042).
ttml2#1049
github: [34]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/pull/1049
[34] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/pull/1049
Nigel: I think we need language here like under tts:extent that
describes errors for validation processing
... and ignoring for presentation processing.
Glenn: If we make that change here we need to do it elsewhere
in the spec too. For example
... in rubyPosition, where we did not call out validation
processing vs presentation processing.
Nigel: Yes, it would be good to make that kind of change here
too.
Glenn: If you'd like to file an issue asking to qualify the
phrase "considered an error" with "with respect
... to validation processing" elsewhere in the spec, but I
would rather not deal with it here.
Nigel: I'd rather get this right first time.
... We could do that, it may generate some additional test
cases.
Glenn: Can you take off your change request here and then deal
with that in another issue and pull request?
Nigel: I'm a bit grumpy about this but yes, okay.
Meeting close
Nigel: Thanks everyone, we're slightly over time, so I'll
adjourn now. Hopefully we can fit our work into
... a 1 hour meeting next week. [adjourns meeting]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
1. [35]Merge this pull request
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
David Booth's [36]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([37]CVS log)
$Date: 2019/04/04 16:18:19 $
[36] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[37] 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, 4 April 2019 16:21:24 UTC