Timed Text Working Group Teleconference

<scribe> scribe: nigel

This meeting

nigel: There's a bit of action to report on and I think we want to cover IMSC pull requests in advance of CRs

pal: Yes, it looks like Glenn is still implementing so if we move to a new CR now we may need another one in case more issues get filed.

nigel: I'd like to know how much time Glenn will spend on it - if its 1 week that gives us one view; if 3 months then it would be another.

pal: That would be a good question to ask.

nigel: Anything else on the agenda?

group: No AOB

Action Items

action-452?

<trackbot> action-452 -- Nigel Megitt to Check with frans about hosting the ibc slides on the ebu space, and send a link around. -- due 2015-12-03 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/452

nigel: Thank you Frans for uploading the slides as requested, onto the EBU space. I've updated the action with the URL:

https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/events/IBC2015/EBU-TT-D_and_IMSC.pdf

Action-452: nigel to add link to wiki prior to closing this action

<trackbot> Notes added to Action-452 Check with frans about hosting the ibc slides on the ebu space, and send a link around..

action-451?

<trackbot> action-451 -- Thierry Michel to Investigate if we are required to move to the 2015 process -- due 2015-12-03 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/451

tmichel: I'm sorry that I cannot report because I've not been able to discuss it with plh.
... I will ping him again today and hopefully report in a few days.

pal: Thank you!

action-450?

<trackbot> action-450 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Check character to glyph mappings for common script value -- due 2015-11-26 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/450

pal: We should actually file this as an issue on github
... I'll do that right now. And I'll include a prompt to remind Glenn about the list of complex scripts.
... [files issue]
... Thank you for the reminder. This one is not fatal but we should find a solution.

https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/103

Action-450: This action moved to issue #103 on github at https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/103

<trackbot> Notes added to Action-450 Check character to glyph mappings for common script value.

close action-450

<trackbot> Closed action-450.

Charter

nigel: I just want to remind us that as per http://www.w3.org/2015/10/29-tt-minutes.html#item01
... we need to prepare a new draft charter by the end of January.

IMSC

pal: I've merged 4 pull requests uneventfully.
... Related to issues #81, #84, #85 and #86

nigel: Great!

pal: The three remaining PRs will be on track to be closed soon. People seem happy so
... we're just waiting for the 2 week review period.
... I don't have any other major things. Glenn has raised some good issues that I'll address.
... I don't expect any further problems with those. How do we manage the fact that we want
... folks to have ready access to the latest version.

nigel: I'll follow up with Glenn to get an estimate on his timescales in implementing IMSC 1.

tmichel: Just to come back to the CR issue, I think now a new trend that was advocated
... by plh is to publish the CR when the group has the level of implementation readiness
... to exit CR.

nigel: I think that was based on being in WD - we're already in CR.

tmichel: Well still we can use that idea. There are still people working on implementation
... so we can wait until we're ready before going to the next CR.

pal: I'm happy to wait. It was not obvious from the /TR page that the ED was really what
... they ought to be looking at, but I'm happy to withhold a CR until after Glenn has
... finished his initial implementation assuming that will be soon.

tmichel: I agree that's not obvious for people. We're requesting people to look at the ED
... to see the latest version but we're asking for implementations on the CR - that's not
... easy to understand. We can still publish any number of CRs with no problem. Now the process is easier too.

pal: One positive of publishing a new CR is that the delta between successive CRs is smaller
... There's an argument for doing that even though we will have the pain of another CR later.

nigel: I agree - it's just that if Glenn gives us a wrapped up implementation report by the
... end of December then we'll think we should have waited.

pal: I agree with that. Let's target a CR version for next week then.

tmichel: To clarify, my position is not to wait for more bug fixes. Personally I think we
... should publish a new CR. What I'm saying now is that there's this model that plh is pushing
... that simplifies the process. Myself I prefer to go to another CR even if there's another one.
... And it's good to make the deltas shorter and shorter over time.

pal: Let's say we set a target for next week to go to CR. Can we close issues during the meeting?

nigel: We can, yes - I view the Pull Request as a call for consensus, which for offline decisions
... is subject to the 2 week decision policy. If during a meeting we have all the right inputs
... and the folk who raised the issue are happy with it then I see that as equivalent to our
... previous working model of closing pending review issues.

pal: What do we need to do to move to a CR?

nigel: We need a version that we can propose to publish, and a minuted resolution to publish,
... then we need to agree the conformance changes as being substantive or not, and if there
... are any that are then we need to meet the Director.

pal: Can we see if we can schedule a meeting with the Director for Dec 18?

tmichel: I'll look at the diary and see if we can manage that

pal: Okay that'd be the best option and would give us a couple of weeks to clean up the
... SOTD section etc.

tmichel: I'll do that right now.

nigel: So you don't think any of the open issues needs discussion?

pal: I'd appreciate review, but they all look fairly straightforward.

nigel: Okay, I think we're out of agenda now so I'll adjourn - thanks everyone! [adjourns meeting]