13:58:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #tt
13:58:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/04/02-tt-irc
13:58:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:58:44 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #tt
13:58:46 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be TTML
13:58:46 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:58:47 <trackbot> Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
13:58:47 <trackbot> Date: 02 April 2015
13:59:12 <Zakim> SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM has now started
13:59:19 <Zakim> + +1.720.897.aaaa
13:59:21 <Zakim> + +1.408.771.aabb
13:59:29 <glenn> zakim, aaaa is me
13:59:29 <Zakim> +glenn; got it
14:00:03 <Zakim> +Andreas
14:00:18 <atai> atai has joined #tt
14:01:07 <Zakim> +nigel
14:01:39 <mike> mike has joined #tt
14:01:41 <nigel> zakim, aabb is courtney
14:01:41 <Zakim> +courtney; got it
14:02:13 <nigel> Present: glenn, courtney, Andreas, nigel
14:02:18 <nigel> Regrets: Frans
14:02:22 <Zakim> +Mike
14:02:28 <nigel> Present+ Mike
14:02:32 <Loretta> Loretta has joined #tt
14:02:46 <courtney> courtney has joined #tt
14:03:05 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:03:20 <Loretta> zakim, IPcaller is Loretta
14:03:20 <Zakim> +Loretta; got it
14:03:25 <nigel> Present+ Loretta
14:03:28 <nigel> chair: nigel
14:03:31 <nigel> scribe: nigel
14:03:45 <pal> pal has joined #tt
14:04:53 <nigel> nigel: Scans through agenda, requests AOB
14:04:55 <nigel> group: no AOB
14:05:29 <nigel> i/nigel:/Topic: This meeting
14:05:35 <nigel> Topic: F2F
14:05:44 <nigel> nigel: We have our F2F on Thursday and Friday next week.
14:05:57 <nigel> nigel: The wiki page is at https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/F2F-april-2015
14:06:17 <Zakim> +pal
14:06:23 <nigel> Present+ pal
14:07:58 <nigel> nigel: We have one request to hold the WebVTT discussion topics late morning or early afternoon.
14:08:10 <nigel> nigel: I propose that we do that on the Friday
14:08:46 <nigel> nigel: I'll update the agenda later, possibly on Tuesday.
14:09:15 <Zakim> +??P35
14:09:28 <nigel> ... Let's start on the WebVTT and mapping topics at around 11:30 on the Friday and continue it after lunch.
14:09:29 <tmichel> tmichel has joined #tt
14:09:43 <nigel> glenn: We can be flexible on the lunch schedule because I'm not ordering any lunches - there are
14:09:57 <nigel> ... lots of eating opportunities so we can just head out to somewhere local when we're ready.
14:10:27 <nigel> nigel: Just for everyone's expectations, does that imply that lunch will be covered?
14:10:32 <nigel> glenn: I'll pick that up.
14:10:35 <nigel> nigel: Thank you!
14:10:56 <nigel> zakim, ??P35 is tmichel
14:10:56 <Zakim> +tmichel; got it
14:11:03 <nigel> Present+ tmichel
14:11:37 <nigel> nigel: Are there any specific topics that anyone would like to have firmly on the agenda and/or
14:11:41 <nigel> ... present on at some point?
14:11:58 <nigel> glenn: I'll add some items that are flexible in timing - I'll do that in the next couple of days.
14:12:10 <nigel> ... They may correlate with the wiki page topics already added.
14:12:27 <nigel> ... One thing I've been thinking about is background painting and the extent of backgrounds.
14:12:33 <nigel> ... I'll add an item if necessary.
14:13:18 <nigel> nigel: There are some topics that we've planned to discuss for a while, such as the timing.
14:13:21 <nigel> ... Is there anything else?
14:13:46 <nigel> glenn: I'm going to talk about the extent and position semantics and pixel aspect ratio.
14:14:05 <nigel> ... I've just implemented these in the TTV verifier and a presentation engine so I have some direct
14:14:14 <nigel> ... experience - it turns out to be pretty straightforward.
14:15:45 <nigel> nigel: The agenda isn't closed yet - there's likely to be more I suspect, possibly some from me.
14:16:06 <nigel> nigel: If there are no other specific topics for now then I want to re-iterate the survey re Sapporo
14:16:26 <nigel> ... and the 2015 TPAC. Thanks to everyone who has already responded. If you haven't, the survey is
14:16:50 <nigel> ... at: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34314/TTWGTPAC2015/
14:17:54 <nigel> Topic: WebVTT comments
14:18:31 <nigel> tmichel: A couple of months ago I talked to the staff contact of the interaction domain for CSS,
14:18:48 <nigel> ... HTML and i18n, and requested them to ask their WGs to review the WebVTT FPWD. About a
14:19:02 <nigel> ... month later we have received a good set of feedback comments from i18n. We're still missing
14:19:23 <nigel> ... the other three. A few days ago I pinged again Bert and Mike. For CSS, Bert has added the
14:19:39 <nigel> ... review request to the next CSS agenda. For HTML Paul Cotton has followed up on Dave's message.
14:19:56 <nigel> ... So we should be set on those two. For accessibility, I know plh has pinged Judy again a few days
14:20:19 <nigel> ... ago so I hope to get feedback from them but I can't say when. I'd like to get the feedback so we
14:20:23 <nigel> ... can move to CR when ready.
14:20:41 <nigel> ... Another issue is how we handle the comments. Currently they're archived in the CG. So at some
14:20:53 <nigel> ... point we will have to respond to the commenter and get agreement from them so how are we
14:20:56 <nigel> ... going to track that?
14:21:19 <nigel> atai: Because the comments are on the CG bug tracker and the responses are there, should this be
14:21:43 <nigel> ... delegated to one place so that everyone can see them? I don't think it makes sense to have a
14:21:51 <nigel> ... separate tracker for that.
14:22:05 <nigel> tmichel: Okay. At some point we have to demonstrate wide review to the Director, so are you saying
14:22:10 <nigel> ... just look into the archive?
14:22:26 <nigel> atai: So it has to be proved that there has been a review and that the comments have been
14:22:31 <nigel> ... incorporated into the document?
14:22:50 <nigel> tmichel: We should have responded to the comments and got acceptance for whatever action we
14:22:52 <nigel> ... have taken.
14:23:13 <nigel> atai: Does this need to be a formal list of raised issues and how they've been communicated and dealt with?
14:23:25 <nigel> tmichel: Yes, at some point we should have a list of the comments and at least some wording from
14:23:37 <nigel> ... i18n to say that they're satisfied with each comment. That would be good enough.
14:23:57 <nigel> atai: Can this be done in the CG, to ask them to follow a specific procedure to satisfy the process?
14:24:14 <nigel> tmichel: It's not a problem to have it in the CG. We just need to show the evidence to the Director.
14:24:43 <nigel> atai: My only question is how we handle the same spec in parallel in the CG and the WG. Is there a
14:24:56 <nigel> ... communication with the CG about the complete process?
14:25:15 <nigel> tmichel: I think the CG chair is Dave Singer and there's no staff contact. It doesn't matter who
14:26:19 <nigel> ... does the job of reporting. What we need is at least a basic document describing the dispositions.
14:26:37 <nigel> nigel: For IMSC 1 we used the dispositions tracker, but I guess that's not the only way.
14:26:43 <nigel> tmichel: Agreed. We need at least something.
14:26:55 <nigel> atai: Is it possible just to have a spreadsheet referencing the bugs?
14:26:56 <pal> q+
14:27:02 <nigel> tmichel: Yes I think that's good enough.
14:27:07 <nigel> atai: And then link to the bug tracker?
14:27:19 <nigel> tmichel: Yes that's good enough. You do need the final agreement from i18n.
14:27:30 <nigel> atai: So we check back with them?
14:27:33 <nigel> tmichel: Yes
14:27:37 <nigel> ack pal
14:27:49 <nigel> pal: We just went through that with IMSC 1 - why not go through the same process?
14:27:53 <nigel> tmichel: We certainly can.
14:28:08 <nigel> atai: I see the problem being additional overhead. Of course it worked fine. From my perspective
14:28:18 <nigel> ... we need to check that it's okay for the CG. That's my only concern.
14:28:31 <nigel> pal: But there's only a single consensus group for this work, and it's this group. The other group
14:28:50 <nigel> ... could be a place for the exchange of ideas, but the formal place where the work happens is in
14:28:54 <nigel> ... this group if I'm not mistaken.
14:29:09 <nigel> atai: That's right, but the groups work differently.
14:29:19 <nigel> pal: But as far as W3C is concerned there's only one group and its this one.
14:29:36 <nigel> glenn: Agreed. Managing the comms is the challenge. There have been a lot of cross-postings
14:29:53 <nigel> ... which is useful for allowing everyone to have an input, but I think the formal decision process
14:29:56 <nigel> ... has to happen here.
14:30:05 <nigel> atai: Can we agree on this without Dave Singer being here?
14:30:39 <Loretta> q+
14:30:58 <nigel> ... What would be good would be to have a close cooperation with the CG.
14:31:02 <nigel> ack L
14:31:16 <nigel> nigel: There are a number of people interested in progressing WebVTT who are in both groups
14:31:26 <nigel> ... so I'd encourage those people to take the lead on this.
14:31:41 <pal> q+
14:31:58 <nigel> Loretta: I think we'd have a hard time persuading the CG to do the paperwork but any changes to
14:32:04 <nigel> ... the document do need to be agreed by the CG.
14:32:06 <nigel> ack pal
14:32:27 <nigel> pal: I think by choosing to put WebVTT on the Rec track that demonstrated a commitment to follow
14:32:38 <nigel> ... the W3C process so that needs to happen.
14:34:50 <nigel> nigel: Can I propose that someone who is a member of the WG takes ownership of the comments
14:35:10 <nigel> ... and documents them, and liaises with the CG to agree all actions and responses in both groups?
14:35:21 <nigel> ... Can anyone volunteer for that?
14:35:28 <nigel> Loretta: Can we pick up on this next week?
14:35:46 <nigel> tmichel: Are you proposing a 'two tick' system where both the CG and the WG approve every
14:36:05 <nigel> ... response to each comment? As well as the original commenter e.g. i18n.
14:37:23 <nigel> nigel: We could do that - I'm not actually bothered about whether the trail of approval between
14:37:55 <nigel> ... CG and WG is on the dispositions document or if its managed separately. But what I do care about
14:38:08 <nigel> ... is that the WG doesn't propose a response that is not acceptable to the CG.
14:38:31 <nigel> tmichel: This is fairly new so we don't have much prior example to work from.
14:38:37 <nigel> nigel: It's a good time to be creative with ideas!
14:38:50 <nigel> nigel: If you do have any ideas please bring them to the table next Friday.
14:39:37 <nigel> Topic: F2F
14:39:48 <nigel> nigel: What is the lead time for dial-in if we want to setup Zakim?
14:39:58 <nigel> tmichel: I can set up a bridge just a few minutes beforehand.
14:40:23 <mike> mike has joined #tt
14:41:02 <nigel> tmichel: I had an agenda question: the topics list starts with IMSC 1 Implementation Report and Test Suite.
14:41:19 <nigel> ... My understanding is that we're not ready to report on or test implementations during the F2F.
14:41:25 <nigel> ... Is that right?
14:41:28 <nigel> nigel: I don't know.
14:41:45 <nigel> tmichel: Are we expecting anyone to bring along implementations or something similar?
14:42:58 <nigel> nigel: I don't know. I don't rule out doing so myself! It would certainly be welcome.
14:43:12 <nigel> tmichel: It would be a great step forward if people do have implementations to demonstrate.
14:43:18 <nigel> ... That's an invitation!
14:43:41 <nigel> nigel: I second that. At the moment it's just a topic placeholder.
14:43:59 <nigel> Topic: Actions
14:44:10 <nigel> action-379?
14:44:10 <trackbot> action-379 -- Nigel Megitt to Obtain png images for #linepadding and #multirowalign test cases. -- due 2015-03-19 -- PENDINGREVIEW
14:44:10 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/379
14:45:13 <Zakim> -Loretta
14:45:24 <nigel> nigel: I completed this, uploaded the PNGs and updated the wiki page. Not sure if anyone had a chance to review it?
14:45:39 <nigel> ... Sorry if I've stepped on your toes there Pierre!
14:45:54 <nigel> pal: I looked at it and it looked okay to me. I didn't see any problems.
14:46:09 <nigel> atai: I haven't had a chance to review yet.
14:46:23 <nigel> nigel: In that case I'll leave this pending review for another week.
14:47:13 <nigel> action-381?
14:47:13 <trackbot> action-381 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Prepare new list of changes to imsc 1 since cr1. -- due 2015-03-26 -- PENDINGREVIEW
14:47:13 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/381
14:48:26 <nigel> pal: I sent round a list of the issues and a diff of the html
14:48:44 <nigel> nigel: Would you be able to stick the URLs into the W3 diff service and send the link round to the output?
14:48:51 <nigel> ... It would help make the differences stand out.
14:49:05 <nigel> pal: Sure, I'm doing it right now...
14:50:05 <nigel> ... Shall I add this to the previous email?
14:50:10 <nigel> nigel: That would be good yes.
14:50:59 <nigel> action-383?
14:50:59 <trackbot> action-383 -- Glenn Adams to Missing XML declaration -- due 2015-04-30 -- OPEN
14:50:59 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/383
14:51:21 <nigel> glenn: I want to push this out to the end of April.
14:51:50 <nigel> ... I'm going to have to dive deep into the jaxb binding and xerces implementation, so I'm not sure
14:51:55 <nigel> ... when I'm going to have time to do that.
14:52:10 <nigel> nigel: Is this a required part of the authoring process?
14:52:27 <nigel> glenn: Yes, I generate the bindings whenever I change the schemas.
14:52:41 <nigel> ... This isn't a blocking issue, and anyone using the schemas is free to add the declaration.
14:52:52 <nigel> ... It might be useful if I add a comment in the schema file to explain why its missing.
14:53:09 <nigel> ... None of the tools I'm using seem to have a problem with the missing declaration, and technically
14:53:25 <nigel> ... speaking XML doesn't require it. It looks like the reporter uses a tool that does want the XML
14:53:27 <nigel> ... declaration.
14:53:56 <nigel> nigel: I see you've already set the date to April 30th on that issue.
14:54:05 <nigel> Topic: Issues
14:54:15 <nigel> nigel: There's one raised issue, which I mentioned last week.
14:54:19 <nigel> issue-380?
14:54:19 <trackbot> issue-380 -- The width of content elements' areas is unclear, especially looking at the examples -- raised
14:54:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/380
14:54:51 <nigel> nigel: I guess this is what you were referring to for discussion next week Glenn?
14:55:46 <nigel> glenn: I've been thinking about ways to allow the background of a content area to be fitted to the
14:56:09 <nigel> ... text content, using a similar approach to what we adopted for textAlign, using an inline block and
14:56:22 <nigel> ... applying the background colour to the containing regions content rectangles only. That might
14:56:37 <nigel> ... achieve the right result. I'm going to experiment with CSS and see if we can handle it that way.
14:56:47 <nigel> reopen issue-380
14:56:47 <trackbot> Re-opened issue-380.
14:57:33 <nigel> nigel: There are 4 pending review issues on IMSC 1, which I'd like to close if we can.
14:57:43 <nigel> issue-367?
14:57:44 <trackbot> issue-367 -- Clarify initial value override for tts:textAlign -- pending review
14:57:44 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/367
14:57:59 <nigel> issue-375?
14:57:59 <trackbot> issue-375 -- Use of the ebutts:linePadding and ebutts:multiRowAlign in IMSC 1 -- pending review
14:57:59 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/375
14:58:19 <nigel> issue-377?
14:58:19 <trackbot> issue-377 -- Use TTML 1SE rounding rules -- pending review
14:58:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/377
14:58:27 <nigel> issue-378?
14:58:27 <trackbot> issue-378 -- Relax constraints on ttp:frameRate and related video object -- pending review
14:58:27 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/378
14:59:20 <nigel> atai: I've reviewed issue-375 and the changes are fine with me. On the informative note I proposed
14:59:49 <nigel> ... to delete it because in the block where the application of the features is described, it says they
15:00:06 <nigel> ... can be specified on style, region, body, div and p because IMSC allows inline styling and EBU-TT-D
15:00:20 <nigel> ... does not. In the note further down it says EBU-TT-D allows linePadding and multiRowAlign only
15:00:36 <nigel> ... as children of the style element. Although this is all true, I misread it and possibly others would,
15:00:50 <nigel> ... to think that because EBU-TT-D is the core reference both attributes can only be applied to the
15:01:11 <nigel> ... style element. Either we can omit the note or tweak the wording to be more in line with what is
15:01:17 <nigel> ... said above. I made the proposal in the issue.
15:01:41 <nigel> close issue-367
15:01:41 <trackbot> Closed issue-367.
15:01:45 <nigel> close issue-377
15:01:45 <trackbot> Closed issue-377.
15:01:50 <nigel> close issue-378
15:01:50 <trackbot> Closed issue-378.
15:02:25 <Zakim> -pal
15:02:25 <Zakim> -Mike
15:02:30 <Zakim> -glenn
15:02:32 <Zakim> -Andreas
15:02:35 <Zakim> -courtney
15:02:43 <nigel> nigel: We're out of time now, so I'll adjourn the meeting. See everyone who can be there in person
15:02:58 <nigel> ... next week, 9am on Thursday, Las Vegas time! [adjourns meeting]
15:03:02 <Zakim> -nigel
15:03:25 <nigel> rrsagent, make logs public
15:03:30 <nigel> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:03:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
15:04:51 <nigel> Regrets+ jdsmith
15:12:11 <nigel> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:12:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
15:12:44 <nigel> ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
15:12:45 <nigel> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:12:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
16:02:35 <glenn> glenn has joined #tt
16:04:15 <glenn_> glenn_ has joined #tt
16:05:01 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, tmichel, in SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM
16:05:03 <Zakim> SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM has ended
16:05:03 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.720.897.aaaa, +1.408.771.aabb, glenn, Andreas, nigel, courtney, Mike, Loretta, pal, tmichel
16:56:50 <Zakim> Zakim has left #tt