14:01:05 RRSAgent has joined #tt 14:01:05 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/28-tt-irc 14:01:07 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:01:07 Zakim has joined #tt 14:01:09 Zakim, this will be TTML 14:01:09 ok, trackbot 14:01:10 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 14:01:10 Date: 28 July 2016 14:03:16 Present: Nigel, Pierre, Glenn 14:03:29 Chair: Nigel 14:04:15 Regrets: Mike, Andreas 14:06:38 Topic: This meeting 14:07:38 nigel: [goes through agenda] Looks like our topics for today will be TPAC and TTML. AOB? 14:07:52 all: no 14:08:04 Topic: TPAC 2016 14:08:07 action-475? 14:08:07 action-475 -- Nigel Megitt to Contact the chair of the web & tv ig to ask about schedule and joint meeting time. -- due 2016-07-28 -- OPEN 14:08:07 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/475 14:08:13 No progress to report on this so far 14:09:33 nigel: We're set to meet on Monday and Tuesday. 14:10:17 Topic: TTML1 & TTML2 issues, actions, PRs, editorial actions etc 14:10:40 glenn: No actions to report on for me. I did have a chance to do a quick review of the 14:10:51 ... wiki page on timing. Thanks for doing that. I think it will help organise some of our 14:11:04 ... discussions on this area. I'm going to start augmenting that page with some additional 14:11:16 ... information for example providing some historical context on some of the terms to 14:11:28 ... help us see where things were and how they developed. That may help us resolve some 14:11:39 ... mistaken text or understandings that have been introduced. The last part of that had 14:11:49 ... an example with dur on body and end on an element underneath which appears to 14:12:00 ... be longer than the dur on body. That would be handled by the SMIL timing semantics 14:12:11 ... but as you point out they're difficult and they're not expressed anywhere in TTML and 14:13:00 ... maybe, though I'm almost fearful of doing it, in the TTX application of the TTT project 14:13:15 ... is implemented some timing semantics as we attempted to interpret it which may or 14:14:58 ... may not be right. So at least I have a working example. So my thought was to try to 14:15:09 ... use that as well as that the documented SMIL semantics to maybe describe the process 14:15:20 ... that we implemented and put it into the wiki to use as a point of departure for maybe 14:15:25 ... helping document that more thoroughly. 14:15:44 nigel: Thanks that will be really helpful. 14:15:56 glenn: By the way on that example, in SMIL end does not express begin+dur. 14:16:09 ... So dur specifies a simple duration where end specifies the end of the active duration 14:16:13 ... which are different things. 14:16:29 pal: These subtle issues are missed by 99.999% of implementers so I really like the idea 14:16:40 ... of getting a baseline based on what you've implemented at least as a starting point. 14:16:43 ... That's an excellent idea. 14:16:55 glenn: I definitely mean it as a starting point because I wouldn't stand by a statement that 14:17:09 ... we have implemented it all correctly either. We can try to refine it based on other 14:17:15 ... implementations and common understandings. 14:17:58 nigel: I wonder if there are any SMIL folk we can talk to about the details? 14:18:14 glenn: Thierry and I were on the SMIL group but couldn't answer for the technical details. 14:18:32 ... The guy who did the main work was Patrick Schmitz - I think he attended some of our 14:18:47 ... early meetings, but he was probably the only guy who understood the spec in my opinion. 14:19:01 ... There was another guy who wrote a book on SMIL, whose name I can't remember right now. 14:19:17 ... He might be another resource. There's a third person, Eric Hodge, who was at Real 14:19:37 ... Networks. I suspect asking him about any of this now would mostly draw a blank. 14:20:14 nigel: Slightly related to this is the new issue I added: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/169 14:20:23 glenn: I saw that and thought it was reasonable. 14:20:41 ... I also think we should add something for timing on break elements, which we added 14:20:49 ... in TTML2 and wasn't in TTML1, so some implementations may not support it. 14:21:41 nigel: Agreed. I also wondered about a feature designator for nested timed elements, since 14:21:48 ... some profiles disallow those for simplicity. 14:22:03 glenn: I'm generally open to adding new features, since they don't cost much. Noting that 14:22:17 ... one of the uses of features is to drive the tests and implementation report. So if we 14:22:27 ... list a feature there then it's harder to make a case that we have two implementations 14:22:36 ... of it than if we have a broader feature definition. 14:22:58 nigel: Agreed. In this case since there are already processors subject to these restrictions 14:23:01 ... I think we're fairly safe. 14:23:59 nigel: Regarding the Safe Crop Area proposal I mentioned last week that I intend to 14:24:09 ... raise an issue and a PR for the proposal unless there are any objections to that. 14:24:24 glenn: I don't see any problem with that. If there are any problems with the PR then you 14:24:34 ... could always address them in the PR branch. 14:24:46 nigel: yes, of course. My plan is to put the SCA signalling in the ttp parameter namespace. 14:25:35 Topic: Profiles registry 14:25:46 nigel: Mike has told me that although he's begun work on the edits for this he hasn't 14:25:57 ... yet managed to complete it, so there's a bit more work to do there. 14:27:42 nigel: We're out of agenda topics for today so we'll finish ahead of time. Thanks! [adjourns meeting] 14:27:47 rrsagent, generate minutes 14:27:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/28-tt-minutes.html nigel 14:35:26 s/all: no/all: no AOB 14:35:41 s/No progress/nigel: No progress 14:37:19 rrsagent, generate minutes 14:37:19 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/28-tt-minutes.html nigel 14:39:18 ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 14:39:19 rrsagent, generate minutes 14:39:19 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/28-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:26:24 Zakim has left #tt