See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 13 November 2014
<scribe> scribeNick: nigel
group: no other business
nigel: Notes no meeting on 25th December and 1st January
tmichel: We have agreement to
publish the FPWD of WebVTT; I'm still waiting on the
announcement.
... I publish the document in place, and then the web master
adds the links, which is the publication process, as well
... as making the announcement and putting on W3C home
page.
nigel: Our plan for today is to
go through all the comments and if we can move them all to
Resolved then send replies.
... In order to do that we'll need to agree a response deadline
for the commenter, which goes into the emails.
pal: I've had some comments from
Andreas and Nigel, which I think are editorial only. I propose
to edit them in place now.
... First one is a typo from nigel - double 'use'.
... For a future agenda, we should consider the general move to
git instead of Mercurial, so when Glenn's present it
... would be good to discuss that.
Frans: +1 to using git
pal: Another from Nigel: for
LC-2977. You're proposing to add conformance language and use
the term "normal rendering"
... I'm concerned with using "normal rendering" which isn't
defined.
... SHALL vs NOT SHALL - I don't think that's needed but could
be okay.
nigel: The bigger point is that "no impact on presentation" could be misinterpreted as "no presentation" which isn't what we mean.
pal: This was a response to Andreas's point - I'd actually prefer to remove the sentence altogether.
andreas: From a practical point of view the text as written could be intepreted as requiring that forcedDisplay must be set to true for everything.
pal: That's only the case if displayForcedMode is true.
andreas: If you set the external
parameter to true and none of the content has an applicable
forcedDisplay attribute then
... nothing is shown.
pal: That's right - by default displayForcedOnlyMode is false.
andreas: The practical implication is that authors might always set forcedDisplay to true.
mike: It's important to note the
relevant external context here, in which a track may be
selected and displayed or not displayed.
... The forcedDisplayMode forces the deselected text content to
play in specific circumstances.
nigel: We need to find an alternate form of words that addresses the editorial issue here.
pal: I'm happy to a) remove the last sentence or b) keep as it is but not c) use the term "normal rendering".
nigel: I'm not happy with leaving as is.
andreas: can we use something like "all other combinations ... do not change the computed presentation" or something like that?
pal: Glenn was adamant that this parameter should have no impact on other computed values - let's not introduce another problem.
nigel: How about removing the additional sentence and replacing "If the value of" in the previous sentence with "If, and only if, the value of" ...
andreas: Yes, that works.
pal: Okay, I've captured that.
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/34314/WD-ttml-imsc1-20140930/2977
pal: The resolution text does not
need to be changed because it points to the latest editor's
draft.
... Next is LC-2973
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/34314/WD-ttml-imsc1-20140930/2973
andreas: I like the solution in
6.2 but in 6.3 what we want to say here is that the namespace
defined by W3C can only
... be added to by W3C and no other entities. The last sentence
says that all undefined names in these namespaces are
... reserved for future standardisation by the W3C. I'm not
sure if that's quite the right term.
pal: I copied exactly what was in TTML1.
andreas: Okay, if everyone understands the intended meaning then I'm fine with that.
pal: I tried to do exactly what
TTML1 already does so at least it's the same.
... Next one is LC-2982
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/34314/WD-ttml-imsc1-20140930/2982
andreas: I think we've already
worked on this (forced display). I was just thinking about the
impact on authors for using
... the feature. I think it's correct as it says, and I have no
further proposal for a change.
pal: The last one with a comment is LC-2978
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/34314/WD-ttml-imsc1-20140930/2978
pal: I think Andreas suggested
that the section 2 Document Conventions should be a direct link
to the section in TTML1
... rather than a general link?
andreas: Yes
pal: The challenge is I think the
conventions aren't only in the TTML1 document conventions
section. For example
... the XML representation is in TTML1 §2.3, but the way
styling attributes are specified is in the styling section
inline.
... So I wanted to cast a wider net rather than a narrower
one.
nigel: I can't see anything defining a document convention in TTML 1 §8 Styling
pal: That's right - we're using
the same convention as the styling attribute tables in TTML1 §8
but it isn't clearly
... defined anywhere even in TTML1. I don't think we can link
to only one place.
andreas: The main reason for the
comment was about the XML representation, where the bold
attribute format is
... defined as 'required'.
pal: So we can add 'in particular see section 2.3 for the specification of the XML representation of elements'?
andreas: +1
pal: [edits in place with slight
tweaks to the above wording for precision]
... I think that covers all the comments.
nigel: In that case I think we can set all the comments to one kind of Resolved or another.
pal: I don't know how to pick the different types of Resolved!
tmichel: They're resolved within the WG then we need the agreement from the commenter.
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/Guide2LCtracker/overview.html#Resolution
nigel: I think we have to choose the appropriate Resolved-[yes|partial|no] status on a comment by comment basis.
jdsmith: That makes sense to me.
tmichel: The three options will show on the final disposition document with green/yellow/red colour coding
pal: When the comments are resolved, how do we notify the commenter?
nigel: If it's okay I will decide
on the status for each one, and then we can send the
replies.
... We need a feedback date though.
pal: I propose by next Thursday so we have the status by the next meeting.
tmichel: My notes do say 'if the
comment meets the commenters request then we should put
resolved-yes' etc.
... so before sending the response we have to set this status.
Then there's another box for the commenter to agree.
... So there are two different levels.
nigel: I'll set the
statuses.
... When I've done that I'll send thierry an email asking for
the replies to be reviewed and sent.
tmichel: That's fine, then I'll track the responses from the commenters.
nigel: And we'll set a reply-by date of Thursday 20th November.
pal: I've checked in the modification to the tip, incorporating all the changes from today.
action-349?
<trackbot> action-349 -- Nigel Megitt to Submit imsc 1 to itu-r working party 6b by 10th november -- due 2014-11-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/349
close action-349
<trackbot> Closed action-349.
action-348?
<trackbot> action-348 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Thank dvb for input re lc-2983 -- due 2014-11-13 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/348
pal: I suggest it is more efficient for you to do this Nigel.
nigel: I suggest we just use the
Replies to Comments here with Resolution-yes. If you can do
action-348 by adding the
... thank you message to LC-2983 then I'll just go ahead with
that.
pal: Thanks, I'll do that.
action-344?
<trackbot> action-344 -- Cyril Concolato to Draft a wg note explaining the differences and relationships between the various versions of ttml -- due 2014-11-03 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/344
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/5ee90ec0d897/ttml-status/index.html
nigel: Cyril has done this and checked it in. The group should review this and propose any edits needed.
close action-344
<trackbot> Closed action-344.
nigel: I've sent a survey email out about CP25 and hope to raise it as an agenda item next week.
<scribe> ACTION: nigel Set the status of the IMSC 1 Review comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/11/13-tt-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-350 - Set the status of the imsc 1 review comments [on Nigel Megitt - due 2014-11-20].
nigel: Adjourns meeting. Thanks everyone - our next meeting is 1 hour, at the usual time next week.