See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 22 January 2015
<LJWatson> scribe LJWatson
<LJWatson> CN: HTML WG face to face in April. Currently a poll for location choices.
<rubys> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/html-spring-2015/
<LJWatson> JF: What is the status of Web VTT? Is it officially a W3C spec that's being worked on?
<LJWatson> JS: It's been in CR since November. David Singer is concerned there hasn't been enough review.
<plh> http://www.w3.org/TR/webvtt1/
<LJWatson> CN: Is this PF or TF issue?
<LJWatson> JB: We had a liaison from the TF.
<LJWatson> CN: Longdesc proposed Recc is closed.
<LJWatson> JB: Update is that the review period closed on Friday. The Director will be reviewing the results.
<LJWatson> CN: Liam has an action to put suggestions into the mailing list.
<LJWatson> SM: Nothing to report.
action-296 due in 1 week
<trackbot> Set action-296 Present substantive alt note bugs due date to 2015-01-29.
<LJWatson> PC: Are we giving this item satisfactory attention? It hasn't progressed since December.
<LJWatson> SM: No, we're not.
<LJWatson> PC: Does the TF want to look at something else then?
<LJWatson> CN: We don't want it languishing.
<LJWatson> JB: People who wanted to work on it have been unavailable recently.
<LJWatson> PC: Can someone point me to the current editor's draft?
<LJWatson> PC: So we're still trying to map changes into bugs?
<LJWatson> SM: Correct.
<LJWatson> SM: If you sense frustration, that's good.
<LJWatson> JB: We have resource shortage right now within W3C team.
<paulc> I guess the unchanged Editor's draft is at http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
<LJWatson> SM: I would just go do this, but was told not to... I can go ahead if it's ok to do so?
<LJWatson> JB: I'll follow up on that.
<LJWatson> CN: We want this to move forward. Need to identify and remove blockers.
<paulc> Alt technique bugs: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=LC1%20alt%20techniques%20%28editor%3A%20Steven%20Faulkner%29&list_id=50965&product=HTML%20WG&query_format=advanced
<LJWatson> JS: It's difficult to do the job we understand needs to happen, with the status of longdesc still unresolved. Don't think we can assume it'll be TR anytime.
<LJWatson> PC: Can someone point me to the bug Liam created?
<paulc> Liam's text: I posted one new bug on alt this week (needing abstract, intro, refs etc as a standalone dog, and drafted possible abstract and intro
s/shane/Liam/
<LJWatson> PC: I don't understand which bugs we're trying to process? Happy to take it offline though.
<LJWatson> CN: Suggest taking it offline with Liam.
<LJWatson> CN: This has come from a series of different discussions. Amongst them at TPAC between myself Brian Kardell and Léonie.
<LJWatson> CN: Tabs are a common design pattern. No native support at present.
<LJWatson> CN: There is a draft specification.
<scribe> scribe: chaals
LJW: The idea is that panels are an old concept that has moved onto the Web.
… draft proposal looks at panel element, with a title and content. In the proposal it can include a label and icon, and could be removable.
… the proposal introduces the idea of a panel set, matching tabpanels and accordions from aria, as well as card decks. It is an early draft and needs work.
PLH: We have interesting markup for application UI, and we are not the only ones. That proposal is very interesting from my point of view.
<LJWatson> CN: It's important we write down the requirements, especially accessibility requirements, so we can make sure the proposed spec meets them.
<LJWatson> m
<LJWatson> JF: Right now there is no mechanism for programmatically linking a transcript to a video.
<LJWatson> JF: One option is a text link somewhere, but I think we need a tighter binding than that.
<LJWatson> JF: There are other options but they've languished. We need to pick up on this again.
<LJWatson> JF: Suggest the media sub-team create an extension spec.
<LJWatson> CN: In search engine terms we don't like to rely on a link nearby. It becomes guesswork, which reduces our ability to associate useful metadata with a media object even beyond than the apparently unavoidable effects of linkrot on searchable but invisible metadata.
<LJWatson> CN: So a track is time based, synched to the video. Seems there is no requirement to time sync a transcript?
<LJWatson> JF: You've identified some of the problems. Needs to be a tigher binding. A child element of the parent, or an idref based association.
<LJWatson> JF: Browser vendors were wary of using the kind attribute.
<LJWatson> JF: We need a solution the browser vendors buy into.
<LJWatson> JS: On memory... we had three proposals 1. No programmatic link. 2. Had a programmatic link but nothing else. 3. Had linkage plus time sync ability.
<LJWatson> JS: Do we have any information on resolution of timestamping? Conceivable the minimum would be start/end.
<JF> https://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:JFoliot/Issue194_Recap#Change_Proposals
<LJWatson> JF: 1. Transcript element. 2. Transcript attribute. 3. New value for @kind - those were the three options.
<LJWatson> JF: There are examples of transcripts with and without timing. Don't think it's a key characteristic, but it does exist.
<LJWatson> JB: Is the suggestion there should be an extension by the media sub-group? My initial reaction would be to discourage development in a sub-team, and bring it to the TF.
<LJWatson> JS: Would want to take the temperature of the HTML WG.
<LJWatson> JF: Someone has to do the work. The transcript element seems like a good option. We should try to put some definition behind that proposed solution.
<LJWatson> CN: If you have content that has no timing, you don't want to put it into a system that looks for timing.
<LJWatson> CN: If we think this is work for the TF, and it seems like it is, we should ask someone to work on it.
<LJWatson> CN: There's a risk this could suffer the same type of problem as longdesc - link rot etc.
<LJWatson> JB: We need clear use cases and requirements.
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to say that this would be the same problem with any transcripts linked via @kind
<LJWatson> JF: The argument of link rot etc. You'd have the same problem with the transcript attrib or @kind attrib.
<LJWatson> JF: One thing we do have is multiple ways to do it, so we need to identify that this blob of content serves a specific purpose.
<LJWatson> CN: WOuld be interested in doing some work on the use cases if someone is willing to work on it?
<LJWatson> JF: Sign me up.
<Zakim> janina, you wanted to suggest that ability to add to the mpeg4 container actually argues for less link rot
<scribe> ACTION: johnf to produce a draft of use cases for transcripts [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/01/22-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Error finding 'johnf'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/users>.
<JF> ACTION: JF to draft use cases for transcripts [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/01/22-html-a11y-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-300 - Draft use cases for transcripts [on John Foliot - due 2015-01-29].
action-300 due in 2 weeks
<trackbot> Set action-300 Draft use cases for transcripts due date to 2015-02-05.
<JF> action-300 due 2015-02-05
<trackbot> Set action-300 Draft use cases for transcripts due date to 2015-02-05.
<LJWatson> JS: The fact we can take different track types as separate resources or bundle them, may be a reason to choose that approach over other options because it could avoid link rot - and keep the pieces associated.
<LJWatson> CN: Re-use looks like a requirement from use cases we already have, where it isn't bundled.
<JF> JF Notes that Sylvia already listed a number of use cases at https://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposal/Issue194_SP#The_use_cases
<scribe> ACTION: chaals to contribute use cases to JohnF [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/01/22-html-a11y-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-301 - Contribute use cases to johnf [on Charles McCathie Nevile - due 2015-01-29].
<LJWatson> JB: Mark Sadecki was monitoring work in this area. Liam is covering some of Mark's work, but we haven't been as active as we'd have liked. I believe the WG is using the last accessibility information we sent them.
<LJWatson> JB: If David Singer is concerned Web VTT has not had enough review, I'd encourage the media sub-group to review.
<LJWatson> JF: I'm watching the conversation about Web VTT. Ongoing discussion around styling. Agree we need to watch more closely. WWould like another accessibility person to be watching as well as me.
<LJWatson> JB: Intent was to help, not just monitor.
<LJWatson> JB:Suggest we put this on the agenda for next week.
<JF> I agree with Judy that we should have at least another a11y SME involved here
<LJWatson> CN: Scope of the TF is things published by HTML WG. Web VTT is not, so suggest this is better suited to PF.
<LJWatson> JB: We structured a liaison between them and the media sub-group.
<LJWatson> CN: Ocurrs to me we're exceeding our scope, suggest we take this offline though.
<Zakim> chaals, you wanted to suggest it isn't obviously in TF scope and sounds like it should be in PF
<LJWatson> JS: Is anyone aware whether the transformation between TTML and Web VTT has happened?
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask if the current WebVTT work intends to become an extension spec, which then asks whether it is in scope for this WG
<plh> http://www.w3.org/2014/03/timed-text-charter.html
<LJWatson> PLH: It's within their charter.
<LJWatson> JF: Agree work on Web VTT is happening inside W3C but outside of HTML. If intent is to make it an extension spec and roll it into HTML5, at what point does it become something we should look at?
<LJWatson> CN: Need to look into this further.
<LJWatson> PLH: Web VTT is of the TIme Text WG. No plan to make it an HTML WG deliverable.
<LJWatson> PLH: We don't plan to make it an HTML extension per say.
<LJWatson> JF: There is a question whether extension specs are really HTML or not.
<LJWatson> CN: Not a question under W3C process, and that's a binding restriction. Beyond the scope of this group.
<LJWatson> CN: Liam, any update on the Alt doc? Or better for you to get bugs filed and report back next week?
<LJWatson> LQ: Some bugs have been filed.
<LJWatson> LQ: Clarified on list.
<LJWatson> CN: If on list we can do this more efficiently offline.
[Thanks to Léonie for scribing]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140 of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/CN/SM/ FAILED: s/shane/Liam/ Succeeded: s/Shane created/Liam created/ Succeeded: s/m// Succeeded: s/proximity/a text link somewhere/ FAILED: s/medie object/media object even more than the apparently unaviodable linkrot for metadata/ Succeeded: s/Browsers/Browser vendors/ Succeeded: s|s/medie object/media object even more than the apparently unaviodable linkrot for metadata/|| Succeeded: s/with a media object/with a media object even beyond than the apparently unavoidable effects of linkrot on searchable but invisible metadata/ Succeeded: s/should be a requirement/looks like a requirement from use cases we already have/ Succeeded: s/Sadeck/Sadecki/ Found Scribe: chaals Inferring ScribeNick: chaals Present: Chaals_McCathie_Nevile Janina_Sajka Judy_Brewer John_Foliot Léonie_Watson Adrian_Roselli JoanMarie_Diggs PLH Paul_Cotton Sam_Ruby Shane_M Found Date: 22 Jan 2015 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/01/22-html-a11y-minutes.html People with action items: chaals jf johnf WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]