14:01:14 RRSAgent has joined #tt 14:01:14 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-irc 14:01:16 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:01:16 Zakim has joined #tt 14:01:18 Zakim, this will be TTML 14:01:18 ok, trackbot 14:01:19 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 14:01:19 Date: 16 March 2017 14:01:38 mike__ has joined #tt 14:01:57 Present: Thierry, Nigel 14:02:01 Chair: Nigel 14:02:07 Regrets: none 14:02:13 scribe: nigel 14:03:55 Present+ Dae, Pierre 14:05:01 Topic: This Meeting 14:05:32 webex is giving me fits - been trying to join for 7+ minutes... 14:05:45 Nigel: For today, we will discuss WR publication of the IMSC update. 14:08:03 present+ 14:08:38 .. Then we have TTML issues, with some "focus" issues that have already had some 14:08:41 .. discussion on the reflector. 14:10:45 .. I'd like to do some meeting planning too, in terms of duration and start times, and also 14:10:55 .. focus topics for upcoming TTML discussions. 14:11:25 .. Is there any other business for today? Or any particular points to cover that may not be on the agenda? 14:11:35 group: [tumbleweed] 14:11:58 Topic: April meetings 14:12:10 Nigel: I'm on vacation for the 6th April, happy for the meeting to proceed if someone 14:12:17 dae has joined #tt 14:12:18 .. wants to volunteer to chair, scribe etc. 14:12:44 Present+ dae 14:13:21 Nigel: I would like to propose we plan for 2 hour meetings on the remaining April dates 14:13:26 pal has joined #tt 14:13:45 .. given our likely progress. Any views? 14:13:49 Dae: I agree. 14:14:10 Nigel: In that case I will default to 10am Boston start time, 2 hour meetings in April. 14:14:29 Nigel: For future TTML focus topics I will return to that in the TTML agenda item. 14:14:37 Topic: IMSC 14:15:02 Nigel: First, thank you Pierre for providing an updated version of the WD for WR for our review. 14:15:26 Present+ Glenn 14:16:29 https://rawgit.com/w3c/imsc/WR-imsc-1.0.1/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html 14:16:38 -> https://rawgit.com/w3c/imsc/WR-imsc-1.0.1/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html 14:17:23 Nigel: I raised an issue about security and privacy that we don't need to do now but should do soon. 14:17:25 -> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/219 14:18:16 Nigel: There were two requests from Glenn, firstly to change "minor revision" to "revision", 14:18:28 .. secondly to make a note about the possible change of name/version in the future. 14:19:44 .. There was also some discussion about adding a reference to a change list in some form. 14:19:59 .. At the moment the Scope summarises the changes but what is needed is a little more detail. 14:20:11 .. One option that other groups use is to link to an HTML diff. 14:20:49 .. Specifically I believe the change list is between this WD and the IMSC 1 Rec, not between 14:20:54 .. this WD and the previous WD. 14:21:05 Thierry: The goal for mentioning those changes is to focus the wide review on the new 14:21:23 .. features only, so therefore you should have the differences between the WR WD and the previous Rec. 14:22:13 Nigel: Firstly then, any problems with removing the word "minor"? 14:22:21 group: No problems. 14:22:40 Pierre: That's straightforward to do, I can do that easily. 14:24:42 Nigel: We've had some discussion about the addition of warning text about a possible version change on the reflector, 14:24:54 .. my personal view is it is not needed - there are a number of bad things folk might do but 14:25:06 .. I don't think any warning we put there will prevent them from doing those things. 14:25:17 .. Having said that I wouldn't have a strong objection to it. 14:25:22 .. Any other views? 14:27:04 Pierre: The likelihood that we will make the change is low so the addition is unwarranted. 14:29:26 Glenn: I view this as similar to marking features as risk. My position is we should add the note. 14:29:45 Mike: I think this matters to those on the phone call, and others including those in W3C probably do not care. 14:30:00 .. I would lean towards leaving this alone and not adding the note, and hope we do not need 14:30:03 .. to discuss it again. 14:31:10 Nigel: Glenn will you object to a proposal to publish this WD for WR without the additional 14:31:13 .. warning text? 14:31:23 Glenn: No, as long as we have minuted this and the decision. 14:31:51 Nigel: In that case I will (as Chair) call this in favour of publishing with minimal changes, i.e. 14:32:01 .. without the warning message, in the cause of expediency. 14:32:21 Nigel: The third issue is about referencing a change set. 14:33:10 Pierre: The idea of providing the reader with an unambiguous diff is really important. 14:33:25 .. Viewers can do that themselves with the W3C diff tool. 14:34:08 http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fttml-imsc1%2F&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fttml-imsc1.0.1%2F 14:36:20 Pierre: We could list the substantive changes, which would exclude the editorial changes. 14:36:33 Thierry: For simplicity I would recommend using the diff tool. This can be done with a link 14:36:54 .. in the spec, or I can save the results in a file that we can then link to. 14:37:15 .. Let's make it simple, put a link to a file in the same directory, and I will generate the 14:37:21 .. diff file and upload it to the publishing directory. 14:37:36 Pierre: Okay then I will not create a link to the W3C HTML diff service, instead I will assume 14:37:48 .. there will be a diff file included alongside and that will be a diff against the Rec. 14:38:00 .. And separately we have to create a list of substantive changes? 14:38:12 Thierry: No, you don't need to do that until we transition to CR. 14:38:40 .. This is just to focus the wide review on the changes only. 14:39:15 Pierre: §6.3.2 of the Process talks about substantive changes since the previous WD. 14:39:39 Nigel: We made a change to the way the Active Area is calculated. 14:39:50 Pierre: So I have to create that file, which will be straightforward. 14:39:57 Thierry: Then just list it in the appendix. 14:39:59 Pierre: I will do that. 14:41:26 Nigel: Ok that sounds like a plan, the 4th and final thing is the Security and Privacy section. 14:41:38 .. My question is: do we need this now, or can we add this at, say, CR? 14:42:00 Thierry: It would be better to have it now, because we can ask the Security guys to review 14:42:08 .. that during Horizontal Review. It could save us some problems. 14:42:33 Nigel: Actually we must ask for that review, and they will ask us to fill in a form, and that 14:42:48 .. will ask us if there is a section present, and we will say no, and they will say to create it then. 14:44:41 Nigel: Thinking practically, what do we need to put into the section? Just the points that 14:44:53 .. I made in issue 219? Are there any other points? 14:45:28 group: [No other comments] 14:45:40 Nigel: In that case I don't mind drafting a pull request for this to allow us to review and 14:45:55 .. include, and move a bit faster overall. I wouldn't mind Pierre doing to either (or anyone else). 14:48:34 Pierre: [concerns about adding an extra 2 week review delay before publishing WR] 14:48:48 Thierry: We could publish without it, and then add it in 2 weeks and update the WR. 14:48:56 .. I don't expect any feedback on this other than from the security people. 14:49:02 .. That would allow us to save a bit of time. 14:49:09 Pierre: I'm happy with that. 14:49:43 Nigel: Ok that works for me, to go ahead without that section, rapidly work on that section, 14:51:02 .. and then publish when we have agreed an update. 14:51:58 .. If people are willing to give positive comments on the pull request sooner we could get it 14:52:07 .. in by positive consensus. 14:52:29 .. I could draft something by end of play today for review and hopefully completion by end of play tomorrow. 14:52:47 Thierry: Would that be okay for everyone? Then we could include it next week. 14:53:07 .. I would rather people would positively agree before, but if an issue is spotted then we 14:53:17 .. could then make a subsequent update to the WR. 14:55:18 Nigel: OK let's try that and see if we can make it work. 14:55:37 .. Those are all the points to discuss, now I'd to move to a proposal to publish. 14:55:58 .. This would be a "mutatis mutandis" proposal. 14:56:36 PROPOSAL: After applying the changes agreed in principle in this meeting we will publish this draft of IMSC as a WD for WR. 14:56:56 Nigel: If we publish this next week when will be the closing date for the review period? 14:58:05 .. Sunday 7th May would be a little over 6 weeks. 14:58:22 Pierre: There will be external organisations who may review, and some of those groups do 14:58:31 .. not meet regularly, so we need to give them the opportunity to reach consensus. 15:00:33 Pierre: I'll use Sunday 7th May. 15:01:07 RESOLUTION: After applying the changes agreed in principle in this meeting we will publish this draft of IMSC as a WD for WR. 15:01:43 Nigel: Thanks, that's all on IMSC, let's take 3 minutes and come back and spend the next hour on TTML. 15:01:47 rrsagent, make minutes 15:01:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 15:01:55 Thierry: I have to leave now. 15:05:30 Topic: TTML 15:06:56 Nigel: I'd like to go through the focus topics, agree next week's focus topics, then go through any other 15:07:03 .. issues anyone wants to discuss. Will that work for everyone? 15:07:13 group: [assent by silence] 15:07:43 Nigel: First one is Inline Space 15:07:45 -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/53 15:09:16 Nigel: Are we at a point where we can agree that if the use case is micro-positioning of 15:09:54 .. glyphs then that data is in fonts and we do not need to support negative inline space? 15:11:12 Pierre: My data point is that this has proven useful in digital cinema over many years. 15:11:31 .. If we are planning to filter feature support based on Lambda Cap then that would make 15:11:34 .. things a lot simpler. 15:12:26 Glenn: Even though there may be a problem to solve we do not need to solve it in the same 15:12:46 .. way. The same problem as fillLineGap exists here in that micropositioning can only be 15:13:07 .. achieved if there is knowledge of the font used at rendering time. We cannot require a 15:15:00 .. sufficiently closed environment where that is known. So my position would be not to add this, 15:15:20 .. especially since other solutions exist such as use of images. 15:15:40 Nigel: Can we make a group disposition here that we will not support negative inline 15:17:11 .. space for the purpose of glyph micro-positioning since other mechanisms exist? 15:17:22 .. I am thinking ahead to the response to the original requester. 15:17:27 Pierre: I will not oppose that. 15:17:41 Preset+ Rohit 15:18:33 Nigel: Ok that sounds like a decision as I described. I will add a note to the issue. 15:19:21 rpuri has joined #tt 15:20:24 Nigel: I have taken off the "Editor considers closed" label and closed the issue. 15:20:41 Nigel: The next issue is #239 3D and images 15:20:50 -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/239 15:23:53 Nigel: We discussed this a little last week but did not close it off because we wanted to make 15:24:04 .. sure all the right people were involved in the decision. 15:24:17 Mike: I withdrew my suggestion, as was clear in the issue. I do not think this is needed. 15:24:31 Nigel: The only open question is if we want named left and right parameters for use in 15:24:37 .. the @condition mechanism. 15:24:47 Pierre: Why? What use case would this address? 15:25:28 Glenn: The named parameters would allow for standardised approaches. There is no demanding 15:25:38 .. requirement for this to be in TTML2. It could be added in the future. In the meantime 15:25:49 .. people could add extensions if they want them. There's no provision in media queries 15:26:26 .. for stereoscopic display targeting anyway. 15:26:47 Nigel: Let's draw the axe down on this and do nothing, and close the issue. There's no 15:26:58 .. requirement for it and we have plenty of other work to do. 15:27:04 .. I will add a note to the issue and close it. 15:27:42 .. Done 15:28:06 Nigel: Next issue is 96: Specify date as well as hours, minutes and seconds in time expressions 15:28:09 -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/96 15:31:17 Nigel: The summary of this is that there is a problem but we have no spec text to address it yet. 15:31:33 .. I don't know exactly what the solution should be or if we should leave it for the future. 15:31:51 .. One idea would be to permit ISO8601 format datetime values, for example. 15:32:19 Glenn: My take on this was that we would leave it for the future. ISO8601 processing is 15:32:31 .. a little complex and can require knowledge of external information. 15:32:48 .. This would certainly have a testing impact. I did not want to suggest a syntax. 15:32:58 .. I don't mind if someone else wants to draft something. 15:33:05 Nigel: I don't think there's an answer for this in SMIL. 15:33:54 .. Is the reason nobody else has a comment on this that they do not use clock times? 15:33:58 Pierre: Yes, that's my reason. 15:34:23 Glenn: SMIL does actually offer an ISO8601 based syntax as an alternative for begin, end and dur I guess... 15:34:33 glenn has joined #tt 15:34:36 https://www.w3.org/TR/smil/smil-timing.html#Timing-WallclockSyncValueSyntax 15:36:18 Nigel: Thanks, that would make sense as a solution in TTML when ttp:timeBase="clock" 15:36:40 .. I don't think it would make sense in other timebases nor would it support a "days" 15:36:51 .. component in general time expressions. 15:37:12 .. I don't mind taking the action to propose that syntax. 15:37:23 Glenn: If the proposal is to adopt the SMIL syntax then I don't mind taking it from there. 15:38:08 .. What's the attitude of the group - do we want it or not? I am ambivalent towards this. 15:38:53 Nigel: The group also seems to be ambivalent but there is a strong use case in live 15:39:46 .. scenarios, either for capture of text or for live authoring. 15:39:57 Glenn: I think the phrase here is "without objection" 15:40:01 Pierre: Why not use UTC? 15:40:13 Nigel: UTC doesn't offer a date either, and in fact the hours component is locked off so cannot 15:40:23 .. be used to express date when ttp:timeBase="clock". 15:40:28 Pierre: Alright. 15:42:06 Nigel: I've added a comment, and will change the labels. 15:42:32 Glenn: Just to mention that syntactically this makes it easy to integrate because the whole 15:42:51 .. clock value including date is wrapped in a "wallclock()" wrapper. It is syntactically easy 15:42:57 .. to integrate in the current syntax. 15:43:27 Nigel: Thank you! 15:43:39 .. The next issue is 160 use of offset-time expression in smpte mode 15:43:46 -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/160 15:45:28 Nigel: I think the problem here is that there is no quantisation rule in case a time expression 15:45:53 .. does not evaluate to a frame value. 15:46:05 Pierre: Shouldn't we simply restrict the permitted time expressions so they do not have 15:46:07 .. this problem? 15:46:24 Glenn: We have deprecated this in part in TTML2 but this is a corner case. 15:46:37 Pierre: Can we not say that it was unspecified before, it is deprecated now, and we are 15:46:40 .. leaving it unspecified. 15:46:45 Glenn: That would be fine with me. 15:47:54 Nigel: Where is the deprecation? 15:48:03 Glenn: It is at §12.3.1 at the end of that section. 15:48:04 -> https://w3c.github.io/ttml2/spec/ttml2.html#timing-time-value-expressions 15:50:46 Nigel: I see. Are there any exceptions where even with the deprecation invalid timecode 15:51:19 .. frame values could arise? Looks like the answer is no from the equations in I.3. 15:51:29 Glenn: As far as I am aware the deprecation covers all of the casse. 15:51:34 s/casse/cases 15:52:02 Nigel: Ok is everyone happy to do nothing on this? 15:52:07 Group: [no objections] 15:53:02 Nigel: Great, I will add a note to the issue and close it. 15:54:15 .. Done! 15:54:23 .. Thanks, those were all the focus topics for this week. 15:54:42 .. Looking at next week, what would people like to focus on? 15:55:48 Pierre: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/240 emphasis-position vs CSS text-emphasis-position + Mongolian 15:56:07 .. It sounds like we are nearly ready to get to an agreement on this. 15:56:32 Nigel: That's on the list. 15:56:38 Pierre: Related to that is issue #254. 15:56:52 .. We should be able to close both together. 15:57:32 Nigel: Okay I'll add that to the list and let r12a know we plan to discuss this on next week's call. 15:58:55 Dae: Can we talk about the IMSC mapping/fallback/transform issue? 15:59:10 Nigel: Yes, thank you for putting that draft together in the week as you promised, we will 15:59:15 .. have that on the agenda for next week. 15:59:58 Nigel: Ok we need more for the list than that - if anyone has any other suggestions over the 16:00:05 .. next few days please email me. 16:00:56 Nigel: In the meantime, we had no AOB, so I will close the meeting. [adjourns meeting] 16:01:00 rrsagent, make minutes 16:01:00 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:09:46 Present- tmichel 16:10:10 s/.. Thanks, those were all/Nigel: Thanks, those were all 16:11:05 s|-> https://rawgit.com/w3c/imsc/WR-imsc-1.0.1/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html|| 16:11:20 s|https://rawgit.com/w3c/imsc/WR-imsc-1.0.1/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html|-> https://rawgit.com/w3c/imsc/WR-imsc-1.0.1/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html| 16:11:46 s/webex is giving me fits - been trying to join for 7+ minutes...// 16:12:49 rrsagent, make minutes 16:12:49 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:13:11 Present+ Rohit 16:13:12 rrsagent, make minutes 16:13:12 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:13:45 Present+ Mike 16:13:50 rrsagent, make minutes 16:13:50 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:16:56 s/Preset+ Rohit// 16:17:28 s/.. Done/Nigel: Done 16:18:31 s/.. Done!/Nigel: Done! 16:21:06 rrsagent, make minutes 16:21:06 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:22:50 s|s/.. Done!/Nigel: Done!|| 16:23:08 s/.. Done/Nigel: Done 16:23:24 rrsagent, make minutes 16:23:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:24:43 ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 16:24:44 rrsagent, make minutes 16:24:44 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/16-tt-minutes.html nigel 18:41:54 Zakim has left #tt