Re: {Minutes} TTWG Meeting 2021-06-10

SILB

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 11:34 AM Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
wrote:

>
>
>   Clarify if the first ISD must/may be constructed when empty
>
>   w3c/ttml2#1232
>
>
>
>    github: [16]https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1232
>
>
>
>      [16] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1232
>
>
>
>    Cyril: The wording proposed by Nigel is good, that defers to
>
>    application.
>
>    … I think the mention of root temporal extent was the problem
>
>   for Glenn.
>
>
>
>    Pierre: That's my objection too.
>
>
>
>    Cyril: Maybe if we just remove that part.
>

The part about root temporal extent was my original proposal, and the only
thing I thought we had agreed to. In my review, I accepted the change that
added a reference to root temporal extent, except for a minor typo about a
comma. I would also note that this equation (active document duration ==
root temporal extent) is semantically equivalent to the language in §8.1.1
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2021/CR-ttml2-20210309/#document-structure-vocabulary-tt>
:

"The root temporal extent
<https://w3c.github.io/ttml2/index.html#terms-root-temporal-extent>, i.e.,
the time interval over which a document instance
<https://w3c.github.io/ttml2/index.html#terms-document-instance> is active,
..."

So, we should go ahead in adding the parenthetical under the *[resolve
timing]
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2021/CR-ttml2-20210309/#procedure-resolve-timing>*
procedure, step (2).

OTOH, I did not and do not agree to add the additional informative note for
the reasons I stated in my comments on the PR
<https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/pull/1233#discussion_r641014973>.

G.