14:00:16 RRSAgent has joined #tt 14:00:16 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/09/14-tt-irc 14:00:18 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:00:18 Zakim has joined #tt 14:00:20 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 14:00:20 Date: 14 September 2017 14:01:02 Present: Cyril, Nigel, Glenn 14:01:06 Chair: Nigel 14:01:21 scribe: nigel 14:01:21 tmichel has joined #tt 14:01:27 Regrets: None 14:02:44 Present+ Thierry 14:04:41 Present+ Mike, Andreas, Pierre 14:04:49 Topic: This meeting 14:05:06 Nigel: First, welcome Cyril, who has joined this group (again), now representing Netflix. 14:05:07 mike has joined #tt 14:05:55 .. For today, we have TPAC agenda, TTML2 CSS mapping semantics, TTML2 WR comment disposition process. 14:06:00 .. Any more? 14:06:17 Thierry: For WebVTT, just to note that the Editor, Simon, has stepped down, so we are 14:06:28 .. lacking an editor. 14:06:49 Nigel: I had the impression that Sylvia had offered to be a second Editor - is that not correct? 14:07:01 Thierry: She used to be an Editor, I'm not sure if she will come back to that former task. 14:07:35 .. Also just a small reminder for people to register for TPAC if not done, and of course to 14:07:44 .. invite new people like Cyril to join the face to face at TPAC. 14:07:54 Cyril: I plan to attend! 14:08:14 Topic: TPAC Agenda Planning 14:08:34 -> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/tpac2017 Our TPAC 2017 wiki page 14:09:05 Nigel: The first question is: does anyone plan to join remotely? 14:09:18 .. If so please let me know by October 20th at the absolute latest, otherwise we will not 14:09:25 .. have a speaker phone. 14:11:35 .. If you have not yet properly registered please do so soon otherwise it will cost more to 14:11:37 .. do it later. 14:12:18 action-504? 14:12:18 action-504 -- Nigel Megitt to Send csswg an invitation reminder by 2017-09-07 -- due 2017-09-07 -- OPEN 14:12:18 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/504 14:12:32 Nigel: I haven't yet done this [slaps wrist] but will do so before the end of the week. 14:12:54 Nigel: As well as the joint meetings there is also the proposal for a demo slot on the .. 14:13:05 .. Wednesday, which Pierre and I are in the process of working on. 14:13:09 s/the ../the 14:15:01 Nigel: [iterates through draft agenda topics] 14:15:49 Pierre: Can we schedule IMSC 2 requirements review for Thursday afternoon please? 14:15:54 Nigel: OK noted 14:16:05 Pierre: The goal should be to publish the requirements following that meeting. 14:16:08 Nigel: +1 14:16:19 Pierre: (unless we have done it before) 14:16:48 Nigel: Anything else to add to the topics list? 14:17:38 Group: [nothing else to add at top level] 14:17:47 Nigel: Anything to add as detailed points? 14:17:54 Group: [nothing else to add as further detail] 14:18:58 Nigel: On TTML <--> WebVTT mapping or HTMLCue, Andreas is there anything to discuss? 14:19:14 Andreas: I'm not sure the group is really working on HTMLCue, so there probably won't 14:19:15 .. be anything. 14:19:28 .. For the TTML <--> WebVTT mapping we may spend a bit of time. I think we said it 14:19:41 .. makes no sense to do the mapping if the WebVTT spec is not stable, so we can assess 14:19:53 .. the status and discuss how to proceed. That's possibly the best we can do. Maybe we 14:20:04 .. can take 15-20 minutes on that, it should be enough. 14:20:10 Nigel: Okay, thank you. 14:21:49 Nigel: Okay that's a good quick review of the topics. Now in terms of scheduling discussions, 14:22:00 .. we have CSS joint meeting on the Friday - I guess it makes sense to do that in the morning. 14:22:17 Pierre: There will be a public holiday on the Saturday that is often observed on the Friday. 14:23:00 .. I doubt it will impact our meeting much. 14:24:02 Nigel: We'll fit the other things in around any requests or constraints - if there are any 14:24:45 .. then please let me know. 14:25:30 .. Any other points to raise on TPAC? 14:26:10 Topic: TTML2 Horizontal review - comment and disposition review process 14:26:15 action-506? 14:26:15 action-506 -- Thierry Michel to Draft a wiki page explaining our review and disposition steps and labels -- due 2017-09-14 -- OPEN 14:26:15 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/506 14:26:54 Thierry: I did this, and sent an email to the group. 14:27:02 -> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/TTML2_Wide_Review TTML2 Wide Review comment wiki page 14:27:29 Thierry: We have comments either coming on the public mailing list or directly on github. 14:27:45 .. Mainly HR like i18n comes on GitHub and the public sends to the public list. 14:27:56 .. In order to process those comments we discussed adding labels on the GitHub repo, 14:28:09 .. so I went through the different steps. The first category is processing comments within 14:28:24 .. the group, getting to a full or partial resolution, and mentioning what type of comments 14:28:36 .. we are addressing, substantive, editorial, typo, general or undefined. 14:28:49 .. Then the second step is to get approval from the commenter or if there's no agreement 14:28:54 .. go back to discussion on the first steps. 14:29:11 .. I have one issue I wanted to discuss. When we are resolving a response to the commenter, 14:29:29 .. either fully or partially, should we first edit the draft and then send the response or wait 14:29:46 .. for approval before modifying the spec. Glenn, that would be an action on you I guess, so maybe you have a comment? 14:30:00 Glenn: I think we do not need to consult with the commenter before taking action. It is up 14:30:33 .. to us if we want to, or to ask for clarification if we want to? 14:30:41 s/to?/to. 14:30:54 Thierry: This is new, to use GitHub rather than the disposition of comments tool. 14:31:11 Glenn: I think there's only one label right now, called Wide Review comment, unless we 14:31:21 .. also consider the HR comments, which I would lump in. 14:31:38 Nigel: Actually the Process puts HR comments in as part of WR. 14:32:07 Glenn: Okay 14:32:10 Nigel: We have these labels: 14:32:15 .. wide review comment 14:32:20 .. horizontal review comment 14:32:26 .. wg accepted 14:32:30 .. needs discussion 14:32:40 .. editorial 14:32:46 .. awaiting disposition response 14:32:49 .. bug 14:32:54 .. enhancement 14:33:24 .. It looks like some are for comment type categorisation - editorial/bug/enhancement 14:33:49 .. And others map more clearly to Thierry's steps. 14:34:02 .. Thierry it would be helpful if you could look at the labels and see if there's a mapping, 14:34:07 .. and if not, propose any new ones needed. 14:34:09 Thierry: Ok 14:34:16 -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/labels Current TTML2 repo issue labels 14:34:50 Thierry: Another clarification. For the first category - if we discuss a comment we should 14:35:01 .. conclude the discussion with a label that the WG assigns. For the second category, 14:35:13 .. which is more process, I will take care of that, drafting and sending a response and adding 14:35:16 .. the appropriate labels. 14:35:40 Nigel: Just to be clear, the first category is "WG processing comment" and the second is 14:35:53 .. "Sending disposition back to the commenter for approval"? 14:36:01 Thierry: Exactly, yes. 14:36:08 pal has joined #tt 14:36:33 Nigel: And then the idea is we can use the GitHub issue labels to provide the right information 14:36:36 .. for Transition? 14:36:48 Thierry: Yes, so we can justify to the Director how we dealt with each comment. 14:37:01 .. Glenn, so when we have a resolution within the group, at that stage do you want to do 14:37:04 .. the spec update? 14:37:27 Glenn: Yes, although in some cases we don't have a formal resolution that requires an editing 14:37:43 .. action. Sometimes I do an edit that the group then accepts. I could go both ways. 14:37:56 .. Technically for editorial changes, I don't even have to go through a review period. 14:38:05 .. The degree of formality may vary depending on the issue. 14:39:42 Nigel: I'd add another step in 2, which is "No feedback received from commenter within the stated period". 14:39:46 Thierry: I will add that. 14:40:00 Nigel: Formally we don't need to have a dependency between spec updates and sending 14:40:13 .. dispositions to the commenter - we just have to have everything complete by the time 14:40:18 .. we request transition. 14:41:06 action-506: [Meeting 2017-09-14] Need to add GitHub labels and extra 2.7 step as discussed 14:41:07 Notes added to action-506 Draft a wiki page explaining our review and disposition steps and labels. 14:41:45 action-503? 14:41:45 action-503 -- Thierry Michel to Send a reminder to groups for ttml2 review by 8th september -- due 2017-08-17 -- CLOSED 14:41:45 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/503 14:42:14 Topic: TTML2 Styling semantics 14:42:33 github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/406 14:43:41 Nigel: When we discussed this before I took the action to create actionable specific changes. 14:44:34 .. I did that, creating a bunch of sub-issues, and that generated some further offline discussion. 14:44:52 .. The result is that I will prepare a PR putting the semantic basis informatively into a new 14:45:09 .. appendix, for each style attribute, and link from a new row in the style attribute table 14:45:24 .. to the relevant place in that appendix. Within the appendix I will include the XSL semantic 14:45:30 .. and the equivalent CSS semantic. 14:46:12 .. That will remove a Note from every style attribute. Before we go into the detail, does 14:46:15 .. that sound okay to everyone? 14:46:27 Glenn: That sounds okay to me. Right now we have an informative note in each of the 14:46:44 .. style sections that point to a particular XSL-FO property, and we have a derivation appendix 14:46:54 .. too, so you should consider moving that information into the new appendix, or leaving 14:47:08 .. it intact and updating it. We don't want to end up with two different incompatible sets 14:47:12 .. of derivation information. 14:47:22 .. If adding these new references to CSS references results in any new documents being 14:47:34 .. added to the reference section then they should go into the informative references not 14:47:45 .. the normative ones. That way I am less concerned about the status of the CSS documents. 14:48:13 Nigel: One thing to note from the TAG meeting I attended was that timbl pointed out that 14:48:36 .. W3C has agreed that Recs can normatively reference CR documents, so there should be 14:48:47 .. no concern about doing that normatively, at least in principle. 14:49:08 Glenn: Many of the CSS documents are not yet in CR. 14:49:11 Nigel: That's a good point. 14:50:18 Nigel: Moving into the detail, I've listed in each sub-issue the XSL reference and the proposed 14:50:37 .. CSS equivalence, so I'd really appreciate any comments on those before I do the editing. 14:50:45 .. I'd like to mention a couple straight away. 14:51:19 Nigel: The first one is that the textDecoration mapping seems like it might be quite complicated. 14:52:04 .. This is because of our inheritance rules for textDecoration, and because XSL 1.1 makes 14:52:14 .. differences compared to the version of CSS that it references, and it's not clear to me yet 14:52:21 .. if a later CSS version has adopted the same changes. 14:52:51 .. I will raise an issue for textDecoration, as well as visibility and zIndex, to complete the 14:52:59 .. set and allow a place for discussion. 14:53:26 .. By the way, I only raised issues for the style attributes that currently reference XSL. 14:53:36 .. All the others either don't reference anything or reference CSS already. 14:53:53 Glenn: On that point, we should be consistent with the use of this appendix so that all 14:54:05 .. references are vectored through it, or as many as possible that have the same basic 14:54:07 .. structure. 14:54:10 Nigel: Agreed. 14:54:45 Topic: tts:displayAlign and CSS justify-content 14:54:54 github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/415 14:56:11 Nigel: I wondered why this uses flex-direction: column and then justify-content, rather 14:56:41 .. than the normal inline direction and align-content? 14:56:57 Pierre: I did do some playing around with this. align-content doesn't behave in the 14:57:22 .. expected way, and only applies for multi-line content, and also that column direction 14:57:51 .. means that the before and after edges align properly. I can add notes to the issue. 14:57:58 Nigel: That would be great, thank you. 14:59:04 .. Is tts:displayAlign writing mode dependent? 14:59:38 Glenn: I think of it in writing-mode relative terms, so if writing mode is tbrl then the 15:00:00 .. alignment axis would map to horizontal in the absolute sense, so "before" would align 15:00:03 .. to the right. 15:00:18 Nigel: I wonder if we have any tests for that? 15:00:36 Glenn: I know that ttt has both syntactic and semantic tests for that but I'm not sure if the 15:00:49 .. TTML1 original test suite had them, it may not. It probably has something for horizontal 15:00:54 .. writing modes only, I'd have to check. 15:01:16 Pierre: I'm looking at the IMSC1 tests... there are a lot of writing mode tests - yes, there 15:01:32 .. are some tests for displayAlign there, including one that looks like it was designed 15:01:48 .. specifically to trigger that - writingMode10. 15:02:21 https://github.com/w3c/imsc-tests/blob/master/imsc1/ttml/writingMode/writingMode010.ttml 15:02:37 Pierre: It was actually in response to ttml2#269, so maybe there's something there. 15:03:28 Nigel: Since imscjs passes the test, I'm a lot more confident in saying this is a good mapping. 15:03:42 Glenn: I just checked and none of the TTML1 tests check this case. 15:03:59 Pierre: writingMode10 was added on top. Also some of the IRT tests include a combination 15:04:18 .. of writingMode and displayAlign, and they're also included in imsc-tests. 15:04:37 https://github.com/w3c/imsc-tests/blob/master/imsc1/ttml/writingMode/writing-mode-tbrl-001.ttml 15:05:12 https://github.com/w3c/imsc-tests/blob/master/imsc1/png/writing-mode-tbrl-001/2.000000.png 15:05:57 Nigel: Great, that makes sense, thank you! 15:07:34 Topic: IMSC 15:07:56 Pierre: The latest release version of dash.js now has support for IMSC 1 Text and Image. 15:08:09 Cyril: As a side file or as embedded MP4? 15:08:16 Pierre: It should do both. 15:08:22 Cyril: Great! 15:08:28 Nigel: Good news indeed. 15:08:44 Mike: I'm unclear that's true - certainly the sidecar works fine, but last time I looked at it 15:09:28 .. it was not so fine with ISO BMFF encapsulated MP4. 15:09:43 Cyril: MSE says that something that is not audio or video will fail. The way it works is that 15:09:58 .. dash.js extracts the audio and video parts before feeding them to the MSE part. 15:10:07 Mike: It applies to any text track of course. 15:13:27 Pierre: A very quick announcement too - I'm planning to release IMSC.js 1.0.0 by the end of 15:13:37 .. this week so if anyone has any comments or input now would be a great time to raise it. 15:13:43 Topic: Meeting end 15:14:01 Nigel: Thanks everyone! See you same time next week. [adjourns meeting] 15:14:05 rrsagent, make minutes 15:14:05 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/14-tt-minutes.html nigel 15:22:31 scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 15:22:34 rrsagent, make minutes 15:22:34 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/14-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:28:16 Zakim has left #tt