15:00:47 RRSAgent has joined #tt 15:00:47 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/12/10-tt-irc 15:00:49 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:00:49 Zakim has joined #tt 15:00:51 Zakim, this will be TTML 15:00:51 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 15:00:52 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 15:00:52 Date: 10 December 2015 15:01:55 Present: pal, tmichel, nigel 15:02:23 Regrets: dakim, frans 15:02:26 chair: nigel 15:02:28 scribe: nigel 15:04:01 Topic: This meeting 15:04:55 Present+ andreas 15:05:15 pal: I need to leave early so can we cover off any IMSC stuff early? 15:05:26 nigel: Yes. AOB anyone? 15:05:30 group: no AOB 15:05:35 Topic: IMSC 15:05:55 atai2 has joined #tt 15:06:46 nigel: We've had quite a lot of activity. Pierre are we able to review the IMSC changes to see which are substantive? 15:06:58 pal: I was planning to do that next week, but we could do some of them now. 15:07:02 nigel: Anything else to cover? 15:07:10 plh has joined #tt 15:07:25 pal: The only thing is this issue of the definition of "prohibited". I'm not sure how much progress we can make on this without Glenn. 15:07:42 ... Otherwise I've made progress resolving the issues online. Thanks for reviewing. 15:07:48 nigel: Thanks for making the fixes! 15:07:52 present+ plh 15:08:13 pal: The other issue is if we need an algorithm for discovering the IMSC profile. 15:08:33 ... https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/111 15:08:52 ... I was wondering if there are further thoughts on that, and the definition of prohibited are the two outstanding issues. 15:09:04 ... Maybe we need to continue that offline since Glenn is not on the call. 15:09:43 ... https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/114 15:10:02 zcorpan has joined #tt 15:10:40 atai2: I'm just wondering if we covered this in Sapporo. I thought we captured the case if no profile is available. 15:10:46 ... I wasn't aware that there's a problem. 15:11:04 pal: That's an important point - it was the topic of a lengthy discussion with Glenn in the room and I think we arrived at language with 15:12:12 ... consensus. I'm not ready to change that language unless there's consensus for a change. 15:12:33 nigel: I do think there may be an issue around the words "successful processing" which we could define as excluding ignoring any semantics. 15:12:48 pal: My inclination is not to change it given the time we've spent on it already. 15:14:23 atai2: I agree with Pierre. We spent a lot of time on it and went through a lot of different options. There should be a concrete alternative proposal 15:14:29 ... if someone wants to change the spec. 15:14:42 nigel: Sorry I think I was talking about the conformance issue rather than the profile issue. 15:15:05 atai2: Also there may be some external information available to determine the profile so that's out of scope of the specification to say which profile it is in this case. 15:15:30 nigel: Glenn has stated that he will raise a formal objection without such an algorithm in place to deduce the profile. 15:16:01 pal: My latest proposal to Glenn is neutral in that it proposes that if a document cannot be identified as one of the two profiles then it should 15:16:07 ... be treated as a generic TTML document. 15:16:14 nigel: I think that seems fair. 15:16:17 +1 15:17:32 nigel: We need Glenn's answer to your question on the issue. 15:17:55 plh: Seems reasonable to me to treat it as a generic TTML document if it can not be determined to be IMSC. 15:18:02 atai2: Same here. 15:18:58 s/plh/pal/ 15:19:02 plh: sounds good 15:20:07 nigel: Is it unreasonable to state an algorithm for deducing which kind of IMSC document one is given a starting point of 'it's some kind of IMSC'? 15:20:18 ... Glenn did propose: "If no ttp:profile attribute is present, then the text profile applies." 15:20:36 pal: I don't think anyone would use that. I think that there's no practical generic algorithm because different circumstances apply. 15:21:16 atai2: I had the same thought as Pierre at first. If you really want to find out which profile it is I would search for image profile specific content elements (as Pierre just mentioned) 15:21:26 ... as they are only allowed in the image profile and not in the text profile. 15:21:34 nigel: Likewise you could search for a span 15:21:37 pal: Exactly. 15:22:09 nigel: The desire is to look at something at the top of the document rather than an in depth search. 15:22:19 pal: That's right, which is the purpose of ttp:profile and ebuttm:conformsToStandard. 15:23:27 pal: There's a document called substantive changes summary, under stack, which is a list of substantive changes. My plan is to prepare a list 15:23:38 ... of substantive changes to it, which we can do next week or beforehand offline. 15:24:35 nigel: It could be a good idea to put the changes into a wiki page for offline discussion. 15:24:38 s/stack/spec/ 15:24:54 pal: Or we could just add issues to indicate which they think are substantive. 15:25:25 ... I've looked at all the commits and collected them together. 15:25:31 nigel: I guess we could label each issue. 15:25:50 pal: That would be smart. I think on past reviews the text document is still expected, so that will be the canonical source. 15:26:02 ... I plan to have that document ready for next week. 15:26:17 pal: I'll set up some time with you Nigel to review the list early next week. 15:26:21 nigel: Okay, great. 15:26:31 pal: [has to leave.] Bye 15:27:22 Topic: TTML 15:28:38 plh: It turns out that TTML has won an award. The email has been sitting in my spam for ages but we never got the hard copy of the email. 15:29:32 ... We're trying to figure out if we can get the original authors of TTML 1.0 to the ceremony. 15:31:11 plh: [describes the history of how TTWG was set up] 15:31:31 ... The WG was setup in 2003. 15:31:43 ... It took me a long time to reconstruct this history! 15:32:34 ... We're struggling to get a quote to them by tomorrow. The cost is 600USD per seat to attend the ceremony. We're inviting people but we 15:32:59 ... won't cover the cost of the event itself. And we don't even have a draft for the acceptance speech. I ended up being the one who is going 15:33:22 ... to do the speech - neither Geoff nor Tim were available to do such a thing. Expect to get more news from us ASAP on that front. 15:33:36 nigel: Wow! Well that's great news. 15:33:59 tmichel: I don't know exactly what this award is - is it for W3C for designing the language? Is it the first language in W3C to be rewarded? 15:34:02 http://emmyonline.com/tech_67th_recipients 15:34:18 plh: It came out of the blue! We were not expecting it. 15:35:10 ... I can't tell you if we ever got an award for HTML. We do believe it's the first Emmy award we've received. We don't expect to get television awards. 15:37:28 nigel: Have you managed to check with Mike Dolan and David Ronca on why SMPTE and Netflix are also listed? 15:37:40 plh: I haven't yet. I was hoping they'd be here today. 15:37:51 tmichel: So the award is shared between all 5 organisations? 15:38:06 plh: Yes. I think each will get a statue but I'm not 100% sure. 15:38:35 ... If you're interested in finding more about it you could look at last year's ceremony in which JPEG2000 got an award. 15:38:54 ... My current guess is that on Jan 9 I will have a statue! 15:40:00 plh: David Kirby will be in our thoughts. He commented on Thierry's draft charter, and was involved from the very early days. 15:40:46 ... We need Glenn too of course. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Glenn was not involved until the end of 2002. 15:41:05 tmichel: As well as XSL-FO, XML he had a lot of experience with internationalisation. 15:41:15 plh: And he had a lot of experience with existing captioning for television. 15:42:12 nigel: Of course the first Rec was in 2010, so there was a lot of work over a long time. 15:43:14 plh: In early 2008 I came in and decided not to use SMIL text but TTML, and drafted a new charter to restart the WG. 15:43:35 ... Then we had some discussions over scope that delayed the Rec (dynamic flow!). 15:44:05 ... I lost the battle, then in early 2010 Geoff asked what was happening, and I worked with Sean Hayes to remove dynamic flow and get to Rec. 15:44:44 ... Geoff and Judy Brewer were not so happy with it because they wanted it for accessibility and Glenn wasn't happy either but that's the very short story of TTML 1.0. 15:45:21 ... The spec is dedicated to David Kirby, which was proposed by Sean Hayes. It was the way it turned out that on November 15th I sent the 15:45:51 ... email to the Directors asking for Rec status and on November 16th we received the news from BBC that David has passed. Then Sean 15:46:11 ... asked for the dedication and on Nov 18th we published with the dedication present. It happened within 3 days. 15:47:25 ... Then the whole issue with HTML surfaced in 2009 and that triggered the discussion about SRT and TTML that led to WebVTT. 15:48:53 nigel: This is a really interesting story - I'd like to see a written down version. 15:49:40 nigel: Sorry to be a boring chair but are there any actions around this right now? 15:50:12 plh: Not right now, but expect to receive an email from us. 15:51:10 ... We're still working on the speech. The link to accessibility is going to have a high profile because it came out of accessibility. 15:51:33 http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-ttaf1-dfxp-20101118/ 15:52:12 plh: We have to send that back tomorrow so we're turning it around pretty fast. 15:52:34 tmichel: The question that comes to my mind is: what is this going to bring to W3C or TTML? First, is W3C going to be granted some 15:52:41 ... money for more research? 15:52:42 plh: No. 15:53:09 tmichel: And secondly, does this push the language to be implemented more? Would that help? Like getting an award at Cannes helps to promote the movie? 15:53:39 plh: I don't know to be honest. This has come from the television industry. Mike Dolan would know more than I do on this front about what 15:54:00 ... it means for the impact on the television industry. I don't think it will necessarily make a difference to browser makers. 15:54:26 ... If it helps TTML in the adoption of the TV industry - I know it's been adopted by SMPTE, EBU, DECE, DVB, HbbTV 2.0. 15:54:31 +q 15:54:35 nigel: There's a whole list of adopters out there. 15:54:52 plh: The one thing you'd be able to say is "Emmy award winner: TTML"! 15:54:56 ack atai2 15:55:26 atai2: That's great to hear, so congratulations. Really impressive. I have some comments on the TTML WebVTT mapping document if there's still time. 15:56:08 Topic: 2015 Process 15:56:21 nigel: I just want to check that there are no queries or comments on the proposal to adopt the 2015 process? 15:56:26 group: No queries 15:56:32 s/group: No queries/ 15:56:50 tmichel: I just wanted to add a small issue about publishing a new CR version as we know that we are going to publish a CR of IMSC but we 15:57:08 ... also know that we have more comments coming in and we will need another publication of a CR after that. Somebody asked me if we should 15:57:40 ... wait or publish now. I think plh's view is we should wait and collect everything for a CR, implement as much as possible and target just 15:57:48 ... one snapshot instead of more iterations. 15:58:13 plh: My common view is publish as often as you can, but you have to balance that with the effort needed and the detail level. 15:58:57 Topic: TTML-WebVTT mapping 15:59:14 atai2: I think given the time we should postpone that until next week, especially as Simon has left the IRC. 16:00:15 nigel: Apologies for cutting off two conversations. But that's okay because we're at the end of our meeting time. 16:01:50 ... It's been an unusual meeting - thanks very much. Next week we have the last meeting of the year. We should have a resolution on 16:02:09 ... adopting the 2015 process and agreement on which IMSC changes are substantive, so it should be a good one. 16:02:23 plh: Congratulations to the group [for the award]. 16:02:33 nigel: Thanks very much everyone [adjourns meeting] 16:03:24 s/Goeff nor Tim/Jeff nor Tim/ 16:03:28 rrsagent, make minutes 16:03:28 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/10-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:04:23 nigel, do you mind if I edit down the minutes a bit 16:04:33 you were too good in your scribing :) 16:05:46 plh go ahead 16:06:31 s/We're struggling to get a quote to them by tomorrow.// 16:06:42 s/ I ended up being the one who is going// 16:06:57 s/to do the speech - neither Jeff nor Tim were available to do such a thing.// 16:07:14 rrsagent, generate minutes 16:07:14 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/10-tt-minutes.html plh 16:09:51 s|s/Goeff nor Tim/Jeff nor Tim/|| 16:10:03 s/nigel, do you mind if I edit down the minutes a bit// 16:10:11 s/you were too good in your scribing :)// 16:10:25 s/plh go ahead// 16:15:30 I edited them directly to be faster 16:17:22 zcorpan has joined #tt 16:17:40 okay, all done before I press go on the minutes email? 16:17:49 all done 16:18:16 Can you take the DRAFT off it? I normally do ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics but I guess that's a manual activity now... 16:18:44 done 16:19:17 great! thanks v much. 16:19:23 would love to see that story 16:20:19 sure 16:22:25 Plus, we didn't go into detail on the call but I think it's worth emphasising that TTML is helping to bridge the TV and Web worlds, because the specs that reference it tend to be focused on connected TV platforms. 16:23:07 On the one hand you have TV coming to the Web, on the other, Web coming to the TV. 16:30:14 zcorpan has joined #tt 16:30:39 zcorpan has joined #tt 16:31:04 NIgel, the story is in your inbox 16:31:23 fantastic, thanks plh 17:03:20 fwtnb has joined #tt 17:03:28 fwtnb_ has joined #tt 17:30:26 zcorpan has joined #tt 17:56:42 zcorpan has joined #tt 18:01:23 Zakim has left #tt 19:35:59 zcorpan has joined #tt 19:46:10 zcorpan has joined #tt 20:04:58 zcorpan has joined #tt 20:31:17 zcorpan has joined #tt 20:31:52 zcorpan has joined #tt 21:25:13 fwtnb has joined #tt