See also: IRC log
<scribe> agenda: this
+http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Media_Accessibility_Checklist
<scribe> scribe: janina
Action 54 needs to be closed. Janina will do.
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 54
<silvia> close ACTION-54
<trackbot> ACTION-54 Follow up that NCAM files can be used in HTML5 testbed closed
Also, close action 65.
<silvia> close ACTION-65
<trackbot> ACTION-65 Will review threads on getting spec text in closed
Did that help?
silvia: between janina and me, we've covered things in user reqs and in email
janina: also, user reqs will move
under html chairs guidance to close soon
... re spec text as we requested -- our request for tech
neutrality not met
eric: think we should file bugs
Conversation proceeds with our concern that W3C not publish anything with technology specific solutions, especially not in a heartbeat.
Janina will forward her mail to Paul to Judy. This was the mail that expressed concern about publishing with tech specific solutions.
We're unclear what is included in heartbeat.
Sam's message came to Janina and also to public-html. Janina forwarded it to public-a11y-html
Judy will lead on anything we might still be able to do about publication.
Silvia: Should we discuss changes on list?
John: Yes
Silvia: Very keen for input esp from Philip and Eric
John: So, we're looking to make spec tech neutral? That's first?
Janina I have an rcs of changes
<JF> Silvia you are breaking up badly
<silvia> my proposal is to start the discussion of what bugs we should report on the mailing list
It was me
Silvia: Proposes we discuss on
list of the changes we want.
... Still want to ref websrt as a baseline, though it needn't
be the only implemented one, want to keep it in timeline
though.
John: Concern that websrt
undefined in w3c space
... Had understood that we wanted to be fully agnostic
Judy: Strong +1 on that
Eric: Minor correction -- WebSRT is well spec'd at both w3c and what at this point
judy: also unaware that it's spec'd in w3c space
eric: parsing is precise as in the html spec
judy: but this is a leap, if the group working on media hasn't agreed on it.
OK, I'm supposedly back, but I have no audio. Trying again ...
Argh, still no audio!
Trying to dial in, but still have no audio!
I'm back ...
John: Silvia, you wanted to see something from websrt remain, can it be made agnostic?
Silvia: I think that's a
misunderstanding
... we need a baseline codec -- we need this for external text
formats
... all browser discussion i've had in the pst months suggest
that websrt, while it needs improvements, is not a bad format
for baseline and lots of people are looking at implementing
it.
... it would be bad if it were the only format we're lookikng
to implement
Judy: But that's exactly the concern, we shouldn't implement something we haven't consensed
Eric: agree we need a req for
baseline, but the decision needs to come out of the broader
wg
... it's really important that browser vendors can start
implementing now to identify issues, and that's orthogonal to
what ends up being spec'd
Judy: So, we need it to gain knwledge. Are we OK that it won't confuse people?
eric: we should remove references from the spec, and the html-wg needs to decide as the wider group on what to use as a baseline
silvia: you're right. i've changed me mind. I'm confusing trial implementations with what's in the spec
john: if it's to be a spec we look at, it does need to be in w3c space
eric: no issue with that
silvia: propose we get websrt
completely out of the w3c spec
... then a separate doc that proposes websrt, so we can discuss
it fully independently of any other contender
judy: can i ask for confirmation
that we're all on the same page?
... it sounds like we all want refs to websrt out
<silvia> proposal: 1. remove all websrt reference from http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/ - probably needs bug reports; 2. evaluate http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/websrt.html independently as a possible baseline format (not sure if 2. needs to go into W3C space for the evaluation to take place)
janina: +1
john: believe all of us on the call agree
eric: whatever we suggest should
be clear that there should be no ref to a format, whether ttml
or websrt, because there hasn't been a decision
... not sure it's important to move a description of websrt
into w3c space at this point
... what's important is to open a discussion
<silvia> +1 on eric
<silvia> ack
john: I've filed several bugs,
Ian pointed them all on me
... filed to make the filing deadline
janina: the clear audio is a misunderstanding. clear audio is only created at production. the spec and user agents are not implicated
eric: fully agree
john: also a bug on pausing audio ...
Silvia: there's an identical bug -- so we have duplicated bug
<silvia> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10941
Silvia: suggest closing the later as a duplicate of the former
john: allow user
pausing the bugzilla discussion now that Mike has joined re heartbeat spec publication
Judy: introducing our
understanding that spec text now added but without neutralizing
tech specific solutions
... is it in the heartbeat?
... It would be a significant problem for us if that is so,
because it's not our consensed direction, and would have
negative effects on our public veracity
<MikeSmith> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/Overview.html
<silvia> Thu Oct 14 22:31:55 2010 UTC (6 days ago) by ihickson <- when the change occurred
Janina waves at Dave
Judy: we very much want not to have tech specific solutions in the heartbeat
<silvia> Revision http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/Overview.html?rev=1.4510&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
<MikeSmith> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/Overview.html?rev=1.4514&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
I've lost audio!
I'm back!
Ah, must be packet loss here -- I'm gone again
Mike: Not my decision, unfortunately. Need to contact chairs on this.
Judy: Are we willing to not have these media sections at all, if that means we cannot get tech neutral into this heartbeat?
General ascent
Judy: seems the reversion shouldn't delay publication?
Mike: They will insist that changes need discussion
Judy: But it seems to us that a change has gone that didn't get discussion
Silvia: noting that unrolling one day would do it
Mike: that's possible
<silvia> Revision http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/Overview.html?rev=1.4509&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
Mike: So are we ok with 1.4509?
judy: would there be unrelated changes that would be lost with surhc a revision? Or is it only our part?
<silvia> revision 1.4509 has no mention of WebSRT and is from Oct 14
<MikeSmith> MikeSmith: this was my mistake to begin with
<MikeSmith> MikeSmith: I should not have used the 1.4514 revision to begin with, should have rolled by to a previous rev
<MikeSmith> MikeSmith: I will roll back to the Oct 12 state
Mike: Actually rolling back to 14494 as it's the version that was prep'd following the decision to go heartbeat
Thanks, Mike!
John: returning to bugs
... also a bug to make alternate versions visible
... do we know it's in the spec?
silence
John: I'll check
<MikeSmith> cheers
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/codec/format/ Succeeded: s/tdml/ttml/ Succeeded: s/15409/1.4509/g Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Default Present: Eric_Carlson, Judy, Janina, silvia, John_Foliot, Mike Present: Eric_Carlson Judy Janina silvia John_Foliot Mike Got date from IRC log name: 20 Oct 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/10/20-html-a11y-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Possible internal error: join/leave lines remaining: <scribe> pausing the bugzilla discussion now that Mike has joined re heartbeat spec publication WARNING: Possible internal error: join/leave lines remaining: <scribe> pausing the bugzilla discussion now that Mike has joined re heartbeat spec publication WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]