Re: {Minutes} TTWG Teleconference 2024-05-09

Good news! The PR Preview for https://github.com/w3c/dapt/pull/216 seems to have fixed itself, if you are interested in reviewing.


From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Thursday 9 May 2024 at 17:53
To: "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
Subject: {Minutes} TTWG Teleconference 2024-05-09
Resent from: <public-tt@w3.org>
Resent date: Thursday 9 May 2024 at 17:52

Thanks all for attending today’s TTWG meeting. Minutes can be found in HTML format at https://www.w3.org/2024/05/09-tt-minutes.html


In plain text:

   [1]W3C

      [1] https://www.w3.org/


                Timed Text Working Group Teleconference

09 May 2024

   [2]Previous meeting. [3]Agenda. [4]IRC log.

      [2] https://www.w3.org/2024/04/25-tt-minutes.html

      [3] https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/281

      [4] https://www.w3.org/2024/05/09-tt-irc


Attendees

   Present
          Andreas, Chris_Needham, Cyril, Gary, Matt, Nigel, Pierre

   Regrets
          -

   Chair
          Gary, Nigel

   Scribe
          cpn, nigel

Contents

    1. [5]This meeting
    2. [6]DAPT
         1. [7]Add informative section about mapping from TTML to
            the DAPT data model w3c/dapt#216
    3. [8]TTML2 ttm:role issues
         1. [9]Permit ttm:role attribute in ttm:desc elements
            w3c/ttml2#1247
         2. [10]Inheritance model of ttm:role attribute is unclear
            w3c/ttml2#1271
    4. [11]TPAC 2024
    5. [12]CCSubs report
    6. [13]Meeting close

Meeting minutes

  This meeting

   Nigel: DAPT, some TTML issues on ttm:role, also relevant to
   DAPT. TPAC planning, there's a deadline.

   Andreas: Also briefly mention CCSUBs

   Nigel: Anything else to cover today?

   (nothing)

  DAPT

    Add informative section about mapping from TTML to the DAPT data
    model [14]w3c/dapt#216

     [14] https://github.com/w3c/dapt/issues/216


   github: [15]w3c/dapt#216

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/dapt/pull/216


   Nigel: One of the points we got exercised about was the
   forwards and backwards comaptibility model
   … After last meeting, I've done some editing work. You may not
   have had time to review
   … PR preview is failing. So you'd need to clone the repo
   locally to view the branch
   … We already agreed to restrict the ttp:content profile
   attribute values to be ones the processor writing the document
   knows it can support
   … I moved that to the ttp:content profiles section
   … I decided the term "foreign vocabulary" was useful, so added
   that
   … Added advice on retaining unsupported foreign vocabulary if a
   child of a metadata element, but require pruning outside that
   space
   … So there's a place people can put stuff where it's not
   pruned. I documented the way foreign vocabulary is supported -
   create a document profile and include the profile designator in
   the content or processor profiles
   … So a conformant processor will know what to do
   … Andreas commented, if you're trying to keep the foreign
   vocabulary, the document might be restructured such that the
   home of the vocabulary might not exist, so I added a note on
   that
   … Please have a look. Any immediate reaction?

   Andreas: Thanks for addressing it, I'll review

   Cyril: I'll also review. We talked about grouping of script
   events, nested divs, where did we end up?

   Nigel: We specified rules and they have normative keywords on
   them. The rules haven't changed
   … (reads the current rules in the pull request)

   Cyril: Ok, will have to read again.
   … A side note, I commented that identifying a script event just
   by fragment ID seems fragile.

   Nigel: Yes. We don't have other rules in place. I think
   ttm:role isn't a good mechanism for that

   Cyril: If a document goes through multiple tools or workflows
   they might add IDs, seems fragile

   Nigel: Not sure if a real world problem, but could be. Could
   end up with empty script events
   … More likely, the opposite will occur, things that should
   qualify as script events don't have the xml id and are ignored

   Cyril: What do you define as foreign vocabulary, is it anything
   outside the ttml and dapt namespaces?

   Nigel: (reads current definition)

   Foreign vocabulary consists of the set of elements and
   attributes whose namespace is not one of the namespaces listed
   in 5.3 Namespaces and the set of attributes in the global
   namespace that are not otherwise defined in DAPT or in [TTML2].

   Cyril: OK, I'll read again

   Nigel: Two potentially overlapping sets of foreign and
   unrecognised vocabulary
   … Might relate to a feature the processor doesn't support. I
   tried to address both of those

   Cyril: I'll read and let you know

   Nigel: This is one of the last CR blocking issues. We should
   try to get it merged.
   … Anything else on this topic or DAPT things?

   (nothing)

   SUMMARY: Recent commit described, awaiting reviews

  TTML2 ttm:role issues

    Permit ttm:role attribute in ttm:desc elements [16]w3c/ttml2#1247

     [16] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1247


   github: [17]w3c/ttml2#1247

     [17] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1247


   Nigel: I opened this to suggest we allow the ttm:role attribute
   in ttm:desc attributes. I've seen real world use of this
   … We resolved in September 2022 to allow metadata attributes on
   metadata elements
   … I noticed recently that ttm:role doesn't behave as I'd
   thought. Spec says it's a set of role values that apply to
   content elements, and it applies to that element and all its
   descendents.
   … So there's no way to invert the application of the role, it's
   an additive approach rather than an inheritance model that you
   might have e.g., color or language where what you set locally
   overrides what's set above.
   … Don't think the model is wrong, but it seems bizarre to have
   role applied to elements in the metadata space

   Cyril: Why would putting things on the metadata element on a
   div apply to the div

   Nigel: That's how it's defined
   … (talks through the spec detail)
   … "applies semantically to the div element and its descendants
   as a whole"
   … If we say, the child elements of metadata, e.g., ttm:desc,
   that doesn't permit a ttm:role attribute. If it should have one
   we'd have to work out the inheritance model
   … There's discussion in the issue. I checked DAPT, it defines a
   different attribute for the same thing

   Cyril: So we should restrict the use of ttm:role?

   Nigel: I think it's fine, but for DAPT we should explain the
   model
   … It's not obvious, which we discovered trying to implement it
   … Suggest closing this TTML2 issue with no change.

   Cyril: What about [18]w3c/ttml2#1271?

     [18] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1271


   Nigel: It doesn't say what happens in this context. My
   expectation is they're additive, so in both cases you are
   specifying roles that apply semantically to the metadata and
   content elements

   Andreas: You'd need to define precedence if there are
   conflicting values

   Nigel: They're additive rather than conflicting
   … It's clear ttm:role on the metadata child does apply to the
   div element and descendants.
   … But not clear that the ttm:role attribute applied on the div
   also does so.
   … Precedence would suggest it could be one or other, but here I
   think you can both

   Andreas: Could use exclusive values, just need to be clear how
   it's managed

   Nigel: Doesn't have to be mutually exclusive, it could be both
   values
   … Should we allow role on ttm:desc? Options are to keep
   discussing and come back to it, or decide immediately

   Cyril: It seems so complex, I'd steer away from ttm:role

   Nigel: It's actually surprisingly simple, but I understand the
   reaction
   … What to with this issue? I've proposed closing it without
   change
   … Suggest we allow more time for consideration

   SUMMARY: Allow more time for consideration

    Inheritance model of ttm:role attribute is unclear
    [19]w3c/ttml2#1271

     [19] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1271


   github: [20]w3c/ttml2#1271

     [20] https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1271


   Nigel: role attributes on content elements also apply to
   descendants
   … Glenn agreed on this
   … Do we also need more time for this? It might be wording
   that's obviously missing, that includes attributes in the
   metadata attributes group
   … Proposal is to add attributes to the current definition

   Cyril: I don't have a strong opinion, so would follow your
   suggestion. Would it need a new edition of TTML2

   Nigel: We're in CR for a new update of TTML2 anyway, would like
   to do a new snapshot at some stage

   Nigel: Any objections to me proposing that additional wording?

   SUMMARY: @nigelmegitt to propose a pull request for this change

   Nigel: I'll create a pull request

  TPAC 2024

   Nigel: Chris reminded me that the deadline for requesting
   meeting time is 20 May. We don't have a meeting before then

   Atsushi: There's a WBS form to fill in before the deadline

   Nigel: I'll assume we'll have a meeting. Gary and I will think
   about joint meetings
   … In the past we've met with CSS, but nothing has advanced, so
   may not need to
   … APA and MEIG, which was useful. Also MEIG is useful
   … I'd hope to be in an advanced stage with DAPT, so would be
   keen to do that

   Cyril: What about the group that does SSML

   Atsushi: There may be a CG, don't think there's a WG

   <atsushi> [21]https://www.w3.org/Voice/


     [21] https://www.w3.org/Voice/


   Nigel: Worth discussing overlap with DAPT

   Cyril: Yes, but generally speech and voice mixing

   Nigel: When we met with APA WG they were thinking about
   embedding speech directives in to HTML, they had a couple of
   different models
   … So would be worth talking with them
   … Do we need anything from Media WG
   … Timed Text in MSE always comes up

   Andreas: The last MEIG meeting briefly discussed requirements
   for subtitles in immersive environments. We could see if
   there's a need to discuss between the groups on that

   Chris: That came from Jer at Apple.
   … There's not really a MediaWG item on that.
   … It was more a gap analysis that Apple had done.
   … It's not something MediaWG has taken on.
   … It would be exploratory. There's no home for it yet as far as
   I know.
   … It may not be a joint meeting with the WG as the most
   appropriate mechanism.
   … It might be better in a TTWG meeting, or a breakout.
   … I'm happy to help and contact Jer about what he'd want to do
   with that.
   … At the time we discussed it in the WG we didn't really
   determine the next steps.
   … It was more being raised for awareness.
   … We could pull it into an MEIG joint meeting type of thing

   Nigel: Any Community Groups to reach out to, probably the AD
   group

   group: discussion of the WBS poll and how to arrange joint
   meetings

   Gary: I can fill in the WBS poll and ping you with any
   questions Nigel

   Nigel: Thank you

   Chris: You can specify timeslots and flexibility re meeting
   times for joint meetings.
   … That means that one of the groups in the joint meeting needs
   to request a timeslot,
   … or we need to point out the timeslot for the joint meeting.

   Nigel: TPAC is 23-27 September
   … Not aware that it's adjacent to other events

   Pierre: Don't see anything major in my calendar

   Nigel: So we probably can be flexible

  CCSubs report

   <atai> [22]https://ccsubs.org/nab-2024-meetup/


     [22] https://ccsubs.org/nab-2024-meetup/


   Andreas: We could discuss another time, and about a follow up
   meeting in Berlin on June 10

   <atai> [23]https://ccsubs.org/mws-2024-meetup-registration/


     [23] https://ccsubs.org/mws-2024-meetup-registration/


   Nigel: I'd encourage everyone to think about getting more
   interoperability in the market

   Chris: and to read the report - it's concise, and tells you the
   key points.

  Meeting close

   Nigel: Thanks everyone, we've hit time. Let's adjourn [adjourns
   meeting]


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    [24]scribe.perl version 221 (Fri Jul 21 14:01:30 2023 UTC).

     [24] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html

Received on Thursday, 9 May 2024 16:59:28 UTC