15:01:07 RRSAgent has joined #tt 15:01:07 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/15-tt-irc 15:01:09 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:01:09 Zakim has joined #tt 15:01:11 Zakim, this will be TTML 15:01:11 ok, trackbot 15:01:12 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 15:01:12 Date: 15 December 2016 15:03:22 Present: Nigel 15:03:28 Regrets: Glenn, Mike 15:03:31 Chair: Nigel 15:03:34 scribe: nigel 15:04:23 Present+ Andreas 15:06:41 Regrets+ Thierry 15:08:20 Present+ Pierre 15:09:02 Topic: This meeting 15:10:19 nigel: I think we should mention the CLDR response from Unicode at least. 15:10:23 ... Anything else? 15:10:29 group: Nothing specific 15:10:31 Topic: IMSC 15:12:09 s/IMSC/F2F Meeting 15:12:26 Pierre: I suggest generating a detailed agenda for example pointing at the issues that we 15:12:29 ... need to close. 15:12:39 nigel: That's true, we need to close issues! 15:16:03 Action: nigel Generate detailed (timed) agenda for F2F to allow people to prepare in advance 15:16:05 Created ACTION-491 - Generate detailed (timed) agenda for f2f to allow people to prepare in advance [on Nigel Megitt - due 2016-12-22]. 15:16:21 Pierre: I'm happy to take a look at that for IMSC. 15:16:41 Andreas: For IMSC 1.1 and also TTML1 we need to spend time on the line gap issue. 15:16:46 nigel: Agreed. 15:17:40 Andreas: Also Safe Crop Area is something we have discussed but do not have anything 15:17:51 ... more concrete to discuss for inclusion in IMSC 1.1, in London. 15:17:54 nigel: +1 15:18:21 Pierre: We cannot finalise the agenda until Jan 8 when we have all the liaisons in hopefully. 15:18:24 nigel: True. 15:24:37 nigel: Also we want to be able to review an updated draft of TTML2 with a view to publishing 15:25:00 ... as a CR, so the outcome of that review process at the F2F would be a set of small(ish) actions 15:25:14 ... or a resolution to publish. So that we can have enough time to prepare for that we need 15:26:10 ... the updated draft from Glenn by 5th Jan at the absolute latest. 15:26:34 Pierre: I think that may not even be possible even if we have a draft today, but we should at 15:27:45 ... least be able to close a good set of issues. 15:29:17 Andreas: The product with the most urgent deadline will be the update to IMSC 1 so that 15:29:27 ... should be taken into account when preparing our agenda. 15:30:10 nigel: So I have an action, thank you Pierre for offering to review/author the IMSC parts of the agenda, 15:30:20 ... and I will also ping it to Glenn. 15:30:35 pierre: What I will do is finalise the IMSC parts based on the liaisons I have received by Jan 8, 15:30:40 ... as soon as possible after Jan 8. 15:30:43 nigel: Thank you for that. 15:31:00 Topic: IMSC 15:31:14 nigel: Thank you Pierre for responding to the CLDR ticket. We got a response: 15:31:20 -> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2016Dec/0018.html 15:32:41 nigel: So Shervin is suggesting that a closer inspection of each set is necessary. 15:32:47 s/So // 15:33:04 Pierre: The folk who put the sets together did not want to miss anything so they erred on the 15:33:09 ... side of being too broad. 15:33:46 ... I can get back to them on that because for instance the Latin Extended A set is literally 15:34:06 ... the Unicode code block that includes u+017F so instead of trying to finesse every 15:34:21 ... character set for every country in central Europe etc. they just said for all Latin European 15:34:42 ... countries we are going to recommend the use of any character within the Unicode Latin Extended A code block. 15:35:42 ... That's inclusive at low cost. I think this is a response to Shervin, to explain this. 15:35:48 nigel: Do you want to write that response? 15:35:56 Pierre: Yes, I can reply to Shervin. 15:36:37 ... If their recommendation is to target each language independently, then that would be 15:36:49 ... useful feedback for us. 15:37:09 nigel: Thank you! 15:37:57 nigel: Anything else on IMSC? 15:38:10 Pierre: Something that also applies to TTML is when features that are required for subtitles 15:38:24 ... and captions are not supported by CSS. If features are required they should be in the web 15:39:04 ... platform; if not they should not be in IMSC (and possibly TTML). I'm not sure how we do that. 15:41:44 nigel: I agree with this, and observe that if it's hard to get implementations of everything in 15:42:08 ... specifications then the last thing you want is to add new features that don't get implemented, 15:42:28 ... since they could hold CRs up for a long time. On the other hand no feature gets implemented 15:44:02 ... unless it is requested/proposed first. So the first thing we should do is trawl the CSS 15:44:41 ... issue trackers to make sure that they are recorded; getting them implemented is something 15:44:59 ... that our members cannot necessarily do, so we do need to get buy-in from the CSS 15:45:55 ... implementers, otherwise we will never get those features in CSS recommendations. 15:48:26 Pierre: We should tell CSS, maybe TAG, AC etc that we have these requirements for the web platform. 15:48:39 Andreas: We also have influence as members on other groups' charters. 15:49:16 nigel: Also (thank you for the reminder) we have received a request from Bert Bos to review 15:49:21 ... CSS 2.2 CR. 15:51:13 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS22/changes.html 15:51:36 nigel: Bert is asking for implementation feedback on the CR, but also possibly for wide 15:52:10 ... review comments. Do you want to request any time for reviewing CSS 2.2 prior to 15:52:22 ... feeding back to CSS WG? 15:52:37 ... (that's a question for the group not just those present on this call) 15:57:56 Pierre: I would support spending time in the F2F analysing TTML2 to work out which features 16:00:58 ... need to be in CSS. 16:01:12 nigel: One thing we could do is to specify in our CR exit criteria that at least one implementation 16:02:21 ... must be done using a mix of HTML, CSS and EcmaScript/JavaScript, and attempt to work 16:02:45 ... out which TTML2 features would need a polyfill or something similar to make that happen. 16:03:00 ... Then we could choose to mark those features as "at risk" so that, should they not satisfy 16:03:14 ... the exit criteria, then we can drop them when we move to Proposed Recommendation 16:03:24 ... without incurring a process delay. 16:03:30 Pierre: I like that idea. 16:04:02 nigel: If we were to set a rule like "don't publish TTML2 unless all features are implementable in CSS" 16:04:17 ... then we would effectively be waiting forever, or it would seem that way, since if those 16:04:34 ... features are only ever exercised by translation from TTML2 to HTML+CSS then I think 16:04:54 ... most implementers of browsers would deprioritise implementation of those features 16:05:03 ... almost immediately on the basis of a low expected volume of usage. 16:05:22 nigel: Ok we're out of time for today, thanks all. [Adjourns meeting] 16:05:28 rrsagent, make minutes 16:05:28 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/15-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:10:09 s/Topic: IMSC/Topic: IMSC drifting into general TTML 16:16:23 s/nigel/Nigel/g 16:16:31 s/pierre/Pierre/g 16:16:35 s/andreas/Andreas/g 16:16:55 rrsagent, make minutes 16:16:55 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/15-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:19:12 s|s/andreas/Andreas/g|| 16:19:13 rrsagent, make minutes 16:19:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/15-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:19:42 ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 16:19:43 rrsagent, make minutes 16:19:43 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/15-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:29:07 Zakim has left #tt