IRC log of tt on 2013-11-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

01:02:58 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tt
01:02:58 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-tt-irc
01:03:00 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
01:03:00 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tt
01:03:02 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be TTML
01:03:02 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see Vide_TTML()8:00PM already started
01:03:03 [trackbot]
Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
01:03:03 [trackbot]
Date: 11 November 2013
01:03:12 [nigel]
zakim, please call taishan
01:03:12 [Zakim]
ok, nigel; the call is being made
01:03:13 [Zakim]
+Taishan
01:03:41 [pal]
pal has joined #tt
01:04:07 [glenn]
topic: TTML profiles
01:04:32 [glenn]
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/default/ttml2/design/TPAC2013-TTMLProfiles.pdf
01:05:02 [nigel]
chair: glenn
01:05:06 [nigel]
scribeNick: nigel
01:06:26 [razybon]
razybon has joined #tt
01:06:43 [nigel]
glenn: describes TTML1 Profiles
01:07:59 [nigel]
... using slides from link above
01:09:52 [tmichel]
tmichel has joined #tt
01:10:12 [nigel]
glenn: Nobody has actually used the "used" value to my knowledge.
01:10:49 [nigel]
... Instead people just used "required"
01:11:17 [nigel]
... to mean both supported and enabled.
01:13:38 [nigel]
pal: do we know in practice how many documents include profile definitions inline?
01:13:44 [nigel]
glenn: no we don't know.
01:14:01 [nigel]
pal: sdp-us, cff-tt and ebu-tt don't.
01:15:54 [nigel]
nigel: can Profiles be combined when defined internally, externally or any combination?
01:15:59 [nigel]
glenn: any combination
01:19:30 [nigel]
nigel: Are external references required to be resolved?
01:19:47 [nigel]
glenn: they 'should' be resolvable but it's not a mandatory requirement
01:22:14 [nigel]
On the 'what's missing' slide
01:23:01 [cyril]
cyril has joined #tt
01:26:03 [nigel]
Profile Designator Proposal
01:27:30 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #tt
01:27:37 [nigel]
Checking which issue or action is related to this problem
01:28:53 [nigel]
pal: creating an action for this
01:31:19 [razybon]
razybon has left #tt
01:32:05 [razybon]
razybon has joined #tt
01:32:54 [plh]
plh has joined #tt
01:33:01 [nigel]
glenn: this designator is just a label, doesn't imply anything about schemas etc
01:33:10 [nigel]
hello plh
01:34:29 [nigel]
pal: this binds the profile with this URI, unambiguously
01:36:14 [nigel]
nigel: it's clear for linking profiles with labels but it's another different problem to define which profiles any particular document conforms to.
01:36:39 [nigel]
glenn: all this designator attribute does is allows the profile definition document to create a machine-readable label.
01:38:26 [nigel]
issue-297
01:38:26 [trackbot]
issue-297 -- Include Profile Designator in Profile Definition Document -- raised
01:38:26 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/297
01:41:18 [nigel]
glenn: proposes that we complete these issues if there are no objections by December 1st
01:41:54 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #tt
01:42:20 [glenn]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: to adopt @designator attribute on ttp:profile as described in presentation, to be finalized by DEC5
01:43:27 [cyril]
RRSAgent, pointer
01:43:27 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-tt-irc#T01-43-27
01:44:55 [nigel]
issue-266
01:44:55 [trackbot]
issue-266 -- add ability for instance documents to declare what profile(s) it conforms to -- open
01:44:55 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/266
01:48:07 [nigel]
On slide Content Profile Proposal (2) tt:root -> tt:tt
01:48:14 [glenn]
s/tt:root/tt:tt/ in the presentation
01:50:10 [glenn]
<ttp:profile type="content" use="ttml-full-content"/>
01:59:10 [nigel]
glenn: scope of ttp:validation is global for the whole document, and all referenced profiles.
01:59:52 [nigel]
pal: can you type an example of what it would look like to specify that a document conforms to multiple content profiles simultaneously?
02:01:22 [nigel]
nigel: have added reference to this proposal on issue-266
02:02:07 [glenn]
<tt ...>
02:02:08 [glenn]
<head>
02:02:08 [glenn]
<ttp:profile type="content" use="content-profile-1.xml"/>
02:02:09 [glenn]
<ttp:profile type="content" use="content-profile-2.xml"/>
02:02:11 [glenn]
</head>
02:02:13 [glenn]
</tt>
02:02:54 [nigel]
pal: that satisfies the requirement for specifying multiple conformant document content profiles.
02:03:07 [nigel]
glenn: there's another way too, a variant on it.
02:03:17 [glenn]
<tt ...>
02:03:17 [glenn]
<head>
02:03:17 [glenn]
<ttp:profile type="content">
02:03:19 [glenn]
<ttp:profile type="content" use="content-profile-1.xml"/>
02:03:21 [glenn]
<ttp:profile type="content" use="content-profile-2.xml"/>
02:03:23 [glenn]
</ttp:profile>
02:03:25 [glenn]
</head>
02:03:27 [glenn]
</tt>
02:03:51 [TatsuyaIgarashi]
TatsuyaIgarashi has joined #tt
02:03:58 [nigel]
glenn: this allows nested definitions of a content profile.
02:04:26 [nigel]
pal: Based on the use cases I've heard of this goes well beyond the requirement.
02:04:44 [nigel]
... Can we document the reason behind the extra complexity?
02:05:14 [glenn]
<tt ttp:profile="dfxp-presentation"/>
02:05:35 [nigel]
glenn: this is the current mechanism. It can only take one URI not a list.
02:05:42 [glenn]
<tt ttp:contentProfile="dfxp-presentation-content"/>
02:06:00 [nigel]
... If we added a content profile that does something similar then we couldn't have a list.
02:06:22 [nigel]
... By using the more advanced mechanism this could reference multiple content profiles.
02:06:45 [nigel]
pal: have you considered extending the current mechanism to be a list, which would be backward compatibility
02:07:42 [Mark_Vickers]
Mark_Vickers has joined #tt
02:07:46 [nigel]
glenn: it sounds like a reasonable extension.
02:09:15 [nigel]
... One argument is that it facilitates adding in the profile features to the document.
02:10:56 [nigel]
glenn: we often end up with multiple forms as shorthands, and this does have associated cost
02:11:18 [nigel]
pal: what about the idea of 'if you use content profile or profile attribute' you can't use the other.
02:11:58 [nigel]
glenn: we already have that in TTML1 in 5.2
02:12:29 [nigel]
group reviews current specification
02:12:56 [nigel]
glenn: it is currently well defined. The ttv verifier tool will warn if both are present, or neither.
02:12:58 [TatsuyaIgarashi]
TatsuyaIgarashi has joined #tt
02:13:24 [nigel]
glenn: I view the attribute as a shorthand for the element.
02:14:33 [nigel]
glenn: 2 proposals. First is to allow profiles and profile attributes to allow multiple designator.
02:15:00 [nigel]
... Second is to ensure that it's possible for a content profile definition to proscribe use of the profile element while requiring use of the profile attribute.
02:16:27 [nigel]
nigel: there's another issue in that people define profiles by behaviour within text in a specification document not just as ttml profile designators
02:16:28 [nigel]
pal: also interested in that.
02:17:02 [nigel]
glenn: are there any immediate objections?
02:17:28 [nigel]
nigel: this does appear to meet the needs of issue-266
02:17:52 [nigel]
glenn: this goes beyond as it adds validation semantics
02:19:45 [nigel]
nigel: we should be careful to avoid confusion in readers between optional/required feature designators and the validation action
02:19:58 [glenn]
action: glenn to consider also defining @validation on ttp:profile, in addition to (override) tt:tt
02:19:58 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-232 - Consider also defining @validation on ttp:profile, in addition to (override) tt:tt [on Glenn Adams - due 2013-11-18].
02:19:59 [nigel]
nigel: also we need to consider the validation scope - all profiles or per profile?
02:20:51 [nigel]
glenn: may need a validation 'none' on per profile validation to override
02:21:14 [nigel]
pal: what is the use case for requiring the processor to abort or not upon failing validation of a document?
02:21:37 [nigel]
glenn: we have two categories: transformation and presentation. Transformation processing is more likely to occur in a pipeline.
02:22:07 [nigel]
... a validation node may be required, to cause TTML to be removed from the pipeline on failure.
02:22:50 [nigel]
... Let's say a document is edited, e.g. features are added or subtracted, perhaps invalidating it. If I'm an author and am paranoid about ensuring profile compliance I may want to specify validation abort
02:23:44 [nigel]
nigel: from a bbc perspective this is the sort of thing we'd like to do.
02:23:57 [nigel]
glenn: from a verifier tool it's very useful for the content to specify behaviour.
02:28:04 [nigel]
pal: the delta between the proposal in the powerpoint as Content Profile Proposal (1) (2) and (3) is:
02:28:57 [glenn]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: to adopt Content Profile Proposal (1-3) plus: (1) extend ttp:{profile,contentProfile} to take list of designators; (2) allow use of @verification* on ttp:profile; pending decision by DEC5
02:29:08 [glenn]
no objections
02:30:15 [nigel]
group breaks for coffee
02:32:59 [Zakim]
- +1.617.766.aaaa
02:33:15 [plh3]
plh3 has joined #tt
03:03:15 [Zakim]
-Taishan
03:03:17 [Zakim]
Vide_TTML()8:00PM has ended
03:03:17 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.617.766.aaaa, Taishan
03:05:52 [pal]
pal has joined #tt
03:08:34 [nigel]
Plan to recommence at 11:15 china time, i.e. 7 minutes...
03:19:48 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tt
03:23:05 [nigel]
invite zakim
03:23:17 [nigel]
trackbot, this is ttml
03:23:17 [trackbot]
Sorry, nigel, I don't understand 'trackbot, this is ttml'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
03:23:23 [nigel]
rrsagent, this is ttml
03:23:23 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'this is ttml', nigel. Try /msg RRSAgent help
03:23:42 [nigel]
zakim, this is ttml
03:23:58 [nigel]
we've hung up the phone, will redial soon
03:24:05 [glenn]
trackbot, start meeting
03:24:07 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
03:24:07 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tt
03:24:09 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be TTML
03:24:09 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see Vide_TTML()8:00PM scheduled to start 144 minutes ago
03:24:10 [trackbot]
Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
03:24:10 [trackbot]
Date: 11 November 2013
03:24:21 [nigel]
zakim, please call taishen
03:24:21 [Zakim]
I am sorry, nigel; I do not know a number for taishen
03:24:36 [nigel]
zakim, please call taishan
03:24:36 [Zakim]
ok, nigel; the call is being made
03:24:37 [Zakim]
Vide_TTML()8:00PM has now started
03:24:38 [Zakim]
+Taishan
03:27:27 [nigel]
topic: profiles (continued)
03:27:52 [nigel]
issue-206
03:27:52 [trackbot]
issue-206 -- Add ttp:profileCombination parameter -- open
03:27:52 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/206
03:28:50 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #tt
03:29:23 [nigel]
http://www.w3.org/TR/ttml1/#parameter-vocabulary-profile
03:38:34 [glenn]
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/default/ttml2/spec/ttml2.html
03:42:22 [nigel]
pal: what is the use case for profile combination?
03:42:43 [nigel]
nigel: not sure of any specific use case, but useful in the TTML -> IMSC -> xyz scenario
03:46:04 [nigel]
glenn: this allows collisions between profiles to be resolved more clearly
03:46:55 [nigel]
glenn: as an implementor this allows parameterisation of the behaviour better
03:47:58 [nigel]
glenn: it's possible that we may introduce this now and find that nobody uses it so we then remove it.
03:48:26 [plh]
plh has joined #tt
03:48:32 [nigel]
pal: argument against adding it now is the profile section of the specification is already confusing for DECE and EBU.
03:48:47 [nigel]
... By adding features we may make it more complex and introduce errors.
03:49:30 [nigel]
glenn: much of the confusion re profiles comes from preconceptions.
03:49:37 [silvia1]
silvia1 has joined #tt
03:50:28 [nigel]
nigel: suggests we have the possibility of restructuring the documentation to add clarity
03:50:54 [nigel]
glenn: tech specs are not user guides. The spec should say the minimum that makes it semantically clear.
03:51:23 [nigel]
pal: agrees with that perspective
03:51:42 [nigel]
glenn: in favour of editorial changes to help readers. The driving factor is whether to use hidden parameters or make them explicit.
03:52:06 [nigel]
... the combination methods right now are hidden parameters encoded in prose.
03:52:28 [nigel]
... When we go through the TTML2 spec process, if there are no implementations we may end up labelling features as at risk and then removing them.
03:53:00 [nigel]
... It's easier to take things out than put things in. Like to err on the side of putting in, if logically sound.
03:53:35 [nigel]
mark: customer feedback from target of the spec is 'confused' so would be cautious about saying 'wrong assumptions' but to address this in a customer-oriented way.
03:54:16 [nigel]
pal: open to see the output of the editing, which may be clearer after refactoring than TTML1. Would hate it to get worse.
03:55:02 [mijordan]
mijordan has joined #tt
03:56:09 [nigel]
glenn: agree with the principle of not adding complexity for its own sake
03:56:55 [Zakim]
+[Adobe]
03:57:25 [Mark_Vickers]
Mark_Vickers has joined #tt
03:58:17 [nigel]
glenn: should we draft a proposal as per previously discussed process?
03:58:19 [nigel]
nigel: yes
03:58:37 [glenn]
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: to adopt Content Profile combination proposals, subject to the DEC5 review period
03:59:34 [nigel]
glenn: Feature relation proposal
04:01:08 [nigel]
glenn: example is #markerMode, #markerMode-continuous, #markerMode-discontinuous
04:01:35 [nigel]
... could use the @restricts attribute to relate the smaller features to the larger features.
04:03:06 [nigel]
... @extends allows extension features to extend existing ones.
04:03:29 [nigel]
... It would be useful to think about this when reviewing e.g. IMSC to identify candidate features.
04:03:34 [nigel]
pal: have done this and have not found any.
04:04:20 [nigel]
pal: profiles can not define new features, only extensions. Can profiles express a restriction on TTML?
04:09:02 [nigel]
glenn: if a profile defines an extension and says it restricts an existing feature it can be expressed. Is that the right mechanism?
04:09:14 [nigel]
pal: so when you capture that you'd put it both in the spec and the profile definition?
04:09:17 [nigel]
glenn: yes.
04:09:32 [nigel]
pal: where would you specify it in the profile specification (the content profile)?
04:10:00 [nigel]
glenn: to reuse the feature definitions in the context of content profiles is to add text describing their meaning in a content profile.
04:10:04 [nigel]
pal: assume we do that.
04:10:48 [nigel]
glenn: if you're in a content profile definition document, this allows enumeration of features that must/may/may not be present in the document.
04:10:58 [nigel]
pal: so you get to the feature that's restricted - how do you declare that?
04:11:19 [pal]
<feature value="required" constrainedBy="http://www.w3.org/ns/ttml/ww-profiles/feature#extent-region">#extent-region</extension>
04:11:20 [nigel]
glenn: you'd need to define a feature that is the complement of the portion that is the restriction and then say use of the complement is prohibited.
04:12:53 [nigel]
pal: intention is to say that the extent is restricted, but a processor that supports unrestricted extent can still go ahead, even if it doesn't know about the extension feature designation
04:13:16 [nigel]
pal: idea is to express still within the feature element.
04:13:51 [nigel]
glenn: we're talking about this in the context of a content profile.
04:13:58 [pal]
<feature value="allowed" constrainedBy="http://www.w3.org/ns/ttml/ww-profiles/feature#extent-region">#extent-region</extension>
04:14:09 [nigel]
... so required means it must be present. What you're really trying to say is that something is permitted.
04:14:13 [pal]
<feature value="optional" constrainedBy="http://www.w3.org/ns/ttml/ww-profiles/feature#extent-region">#extent-region</extension>
04:14:30 [nigel]
glenn: this is therefore a no-op for any verifier.
04:14:58 [nigel]
glenn: what you're trying to do is to prohibit a document from expressing a value that goes out of the document.
04:16:19 [nigel]
glenn: from the validation perspective optional doesn't help. Suggest we take this offline and see if we can resolve it.
04:16:57 [nigel]
pal: can't see the value of this for IMSC
04:20:12 [nigel]
nigel: @restricts and @extends have almost opposite meanings dependent on whether they're processor or content profile features
04:20:24 [nigel]
... can we come up with different labels that don't have the same connotations?
04:20:30 [nigel]
glenn: we can try to come up with better terms.
04:20:45 [nigel]
pal: was just trying to understand the intent.
04:21:09 [nigel]
glenn: raises the issue of what do content profiles mean? Is it just for validation tools, or something that will be used.
04:21:28 [nigel]
... when you get to the presentation processor its too late in most cases to do anything about it.
04:23:21 [nigel]
glenn: happy to think further about this last proposal and table it subject to further discussion.
04:24:48 [glenn]
sense of the room: table feature relation proposal subject to further offline discussion
04:27:35 [nigel]
will break for lunch now, return at 1:30
04:28:17 [Zakim]
-Taishan
04:28:33 [nigel]
rrsagent, generate minutes
04:28:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-tt-minutes.html nigel
04:28:39 [Zakim]
-[Adobe]
04:28:40 [Zakim]
Vide_TTML()8:00PM has ended
04:28:40 [Zakim]
Attendees were Taishan, [Adobe]
05:18:22 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #tt
05:32:39 [pal]
pal has joined #tt
05:35:31 [nigel]
nigel has joined #tt
05:35:38 [nigel]
trackbot, start meeting
05:35:40 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
05:35:42 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be TTML
05:35:42 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
05:35:43 [trackbot]
Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
05:35:43 [trackbot]
Date: 11 November 2013
05:35:48 [nigel]
zakim, this is ttml
05:35:48 [Zakim]
sorry, nigel, I do not see a conference named 'ttml' in progress or scheduled at this time
05:37:14 [glenn]
zakim, list conferences
05:37:14 [Zakim]
I see IA_WebApps()7:00PM, Team_(webbrobg)04:12Z, Team_(css)04:31Z active
05:37:16 [Zakim]
also scheduled at this time is Team_(xquery)03:03Z
05:37:19 [silvia]
silvia has joined #tt
05:39:29 [plh]
plh has joined #tt
05:40:22 [pal]
@plh zakim seems to have no records of ttml meeting
05:40:55 [razybon]
razybon has joined #tt
05:41:07 [glenn]
zakim, this will be Vide_TTML
05:41:07 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, glenn
05:41:31 [glenn]
zakim, this is 8865
05:41:31 [Zakim]
sorry, glenn, I do not see a conference named '8865' in progress or scheduled at this time
05:42:22 [plh]
zakim, this is TTML
05:42:22 [Zakim]
sorry, plh, I do not see a conference named 'TTML' in progress or scheduled at this time
05:42:31 [plh]
zakim, I don't like you
05:42:31 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'I don't like you', plh
05:44:38 [tmichel]
tmichel has joined #tt
05:45:10 [plh]
we could create an ad-hoc call instead
05:45:16 [plh]
that would do the trick for now
05:45:23 [plh]
ok?
05:45:31 [glenn]
yes
05:45:49 [plh]
zakim, room for 4 for 240 minutes?
05:45:51 [Zakim]
ok, plh; conference Team_(tt)05:45Z scheduled with code 26634 (CONF4) for 240 minutes until 0945Z
05:46:00 [plh]
zakim, call taishan
05:46:00 [Zakim]
ok, plh; the call is being made
05:46:00 [Zakim]
Team_(tt)05:45Z has now started
05:46:03 [Zakim]
+Taishan
05:46:28 [plh]
if I was correct, the room should be connected now
05:46:33 [nigel]
yes it is
05:46:39 [cyril]
cyril has joined #tt
05:46:41 [plh]
zakim, passcode?
05:46:41 [Zakim]
the conference code is 26634 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), plh
05:46:59 [plh]
the others should use this password
05:47:01 [tm]
tm has joined #tt
05:48:27 [nigel]
chair: nigel
05:49:15 [nigel]
scribeNick: pal
05:51:20 [pal]
agenda: ISSUE-285
05:51:55 [israelh_]
israelh_ has joined #TT
06:07:52 [pal]
nigel: mulitrowAlign is intended to allow the author to specify alignement relative to the longest lign of a <p> without a priori knowledge of line length
06:08:02 [pal]
nigel: would CSS flex box work
06:08:33 [pal]
glenn: suggest creating an example based on CSS
06:08:59 [tmichel__]
tmichel__ has joined #tt
06:09:28 [pal]
glenn: unless there is a mapping to CSS, a feature will likely be ignored by OWP
06:11:58 [pal]
glenn: mapping to svg is a potential, but higher cost
06:16:33 [pal]
ACTION: glenn to reach out to CSS WG to understand potential mappinp of multiRowAlign to CSS
06:16:33 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-233 - Reach out to css wg to understand potential mappinp of multirowalign to css [on Glenn Adams - due 2013-11-18].
06:17:01 [pal]
ISSUE-286
06:17:01 [trackbot]
ISSUE-286 -- Extend the background area behind rendered text to improve readability -- open
06:17:01 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/286
06:19:04 [silvia1]
silvia1 has joined #tt
06:20:06 [pal]
nigel: adding padding at end of row improves legibility
06:20:34 [pal]
glenn: CSS folks mentioned box-decoration-break as a possibiliy
06:24:23 [pal]
ACTIOM: glenn to explore box-decoration-break in response to ISSUE-286
06:24:30 [pal]
ACTION: glenn to explore box-decoration-break in response to ISSUE-286
06:24:30 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-234 - Explore box-decoration-break in response to issue-286 [on Glenn Adams - due 2013-11-18].
06:24:45 [pal]
glenn: <br> and white space as an alternative
06:24:56 [pal]
nigel: undesirable since it mixes semantics and presentation
06:25:47 [pal]
ISSUE-286: CSS folks mentioned box-decoration-break as a possibiliy
06:25:47 [trackbot]
Notes added to ISSUE-286 Extend the background area behind rendered text to improve readability.
06:28:52 [pal]
ISSUE-294
06:28:52 [trackbot]
ISSUE-294 -- Style attribute to prevent overflow by shrinking text to fit on a line -- raised
06:28:52 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/294
06:31:31 [pal]
nigel: "shrink-text-to-fit" is optimal option to ensure that all text shows up
06:32:00 [pal]
nigel: "shrink-text-to-fit" is dormant issue in CSS
06:33:06 [pal]
pal: all 3 options: dl fonts, "shrink-text-to-fit" and reference fonts are not mutually exclusive
06:35:08 [plh]
plh has joined #tt
06:36:34 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #tt
06:41:00 [pal]
nigel: should TTML 2 support downloadable fonts
06:42:58 [pal]
glenn: font height > font width usually so worse case line width can be estimated
06:44:29 [pal]
glenn: it would be good to explore downloadable fonts
06:45:05 [pal]
glenn: CSS alows a URL to be associated with combination of font family and style
06:45:33 [pal]
glenn: TTML 1 did not allow document to reference external resources
06:46:38 [glenn]
@font-face { font-family: FooBar; src: url('http://fonts.org/foobar.woff'); }
06:47:02 [glenn]
<p tts:fontFamily="FooBar">foo bar baz</p>
06:48:43 [pal]
PROPOSAL: add support for downloadable fonts in TTML 2
06:51:56 [nigel]
issue-273
06:51:56 [trackbot]
issue-273 -- Map fontFamily to external font file resources -- open
06:51:56 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/273
06:52:33 [pal]
ISSUE-273: TPAC 2013 PROPOSAL: add support for downloadable fonts in TTML 2
06:52:33 [trackbot]
Notes added to ISSUE-273 Map fontFamily to external font file resources.
06:56:12 [pal]
pal: not implementations will support downloadable fonts
06:56:49 [pal]
pal: so downloadable fonts is not magic bullet therefore
07:09:58 [pal]
nigel: add margins and reference fonts to delivery specs
07:10:42 [pal]
nigel: specify end-of-line allowance and reference fonts to delivery specs
07:10:46 [nigel]
nigel: (not in TTML2 - adding safety allowances is a specification issue for clients commissioning subtitle documents)
07:11:26 [pal]
pal: different implementations will render the same font file differently
07:11:36 [pal]
pal: authors should use <br>
07:19:14 [pal]
ISSUE-283: TPAC 2013 PROPOSAL: add informative text (e.g. to Section 9.4) on controlling line breaks (see also issue-273 on downloadable fonts)
07:19:15 [trackbot]
Notes added to ISSUE-283 Deterministic text wrapping and presentation.
07:21:18 [nigel]
Breaking for 30 mins
07:25:49 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #tt
07:46:04 [Zakim]
-Taishan
07:46:05 [Zakim]
Team_(tt)05:45Z has ended
07:46:05 [Zakim]
Attendees were Taishan
07:49:39 [nigel]
zakim, what conference is this?
07:49:39 [Zakim]
this will be Team_(tt)05:45Z conference code 26634, nigel
07:49:40 [Zakim]
this was Team_(tt)05:45Z
07:58:50 [pal]
pal has joined #tt
08:00:33 [pal]
ISSUE-288
08:00:33 [trackbot]
ISSUE-288 -- Rules for splitting and accumulating documents -- open
08:00:33 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/288
08:05:21 [Mark_Vickers]
Mark_Vickers has joined #tt
08:44:54 [pal]
nigel: presented EBU input document.
08:45:11 [pal]
ACTION: nigel to post EBU input document re: ISSUE-288
08:45:11 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-235 - Post ebu input document re: issue-288 [on Nigel Megitt - due 2013-11-18].
08:49:23 [plh]
plh has joined #tt
08:51:14 [pal]
s/issue-288/issue-270
08:52:28 [pal]
nigel: splitting and accumulating document should probably be in a separate document
08:52:36 [pal]
s/nigel/glenn
08:54:41 [pal]
s/issue-270/issue-288
08:55:09 [pal]
ISSUE-270
08:55:09 [trackbot]
ISSUE-270 -- Appendix N assumption that root temporal extent corresponds with the beginning of a related media object -- open
08:55:09 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/270
09:05:52 [pal]
ACTION: glenn to review consistent use of "Root Temporal Extent" in both TTML 2 and TTML 1 SE
09:05:52 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-236 - Review consistent use of "root temporal extent" in both ttml 2 and ttml 1 se [on Glenn Adams - due 2013-11-18].
09:06:13 [pal]
ACTION-236: See ISSUE-270
09:06:13 [trackbot]
Notes added to ACTION-236 Review consistent use of "root temporal extent" in both ttml 2 and ttml 1 se.
09:07:21 [nigel]
chair: pal
09:07:26 [nigel]
scribeNick: nigel
09:07:39 [nigel]
topic: IMSC
09:07:47 [nigel]
issue-296
09:07:47 [trackbot]
issue-296 -- Remove xml:lang placement restrictions from IMSC -- raised
09:07:47 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/296
09:07:52 [silvia]
silvia has joined #tt
09:08:50 [nigel]
plh, is richard ishida likely to be able to attend?
09:09:15 [plh]
I thought we said Friday
09:09:20 [nigel]
issue-296: pal proposes removing the xml:lang constraint
09:09:21 [trackbot]
Notes added to issue-296 Remove xml:lang placement restrictions from IMSC.
09:09:43 [nigel]
plh, I didn't think we had. If he were around soon that'd be handy as we're discussing IMSC
09:09:43 [plh]
at what time would you ike Richard to be in the room?
09:09:50 [plh]
ok, let me ask him
09:10:25 [plh]
I can't locate him at the moment :(
09:10:45 [nigel]
glenn: opentext defines different rendering rules dependent on language, script and feature.
09:11:00 [nigel]
... language is obtained from xml:lang
09:11:25 [nigel]
s/opentext/opentype
09:12:23 [nigel]
glenn: many fonts have different rendering rules dependent on language, e.g. arabic is used to express pashto, arabic and other languages.
09:13:07 [nigel]
action: pal to review with CFF folk
09:13:07 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-237 - Review with cff folk [on Pierre-Anthony Lemieux - due 2013-11-18].
09:14:18 [nigel]
issue-296: pal removes proposal to restrict xml:lang in IMSC though may re-instate it depending on CFF response
09:14:18 [trackbot]
Notes added to issue-296 Remove xml:lang placement restrictions from IMSC.
09:14:29 [nigel]
glenn: line breaking algorithms also depend on xml:lang
09:14:32 [nigel]
issue-295
09:14:32 [trackbot]
issue-295 -- Remove code point restrictions from IMSC -- raised
09:14:32 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/295
09:14:52 [nigel]
pal: looks like 3 separate issues.
09:15:35 [nigel]
... 1) Inference that IMSC limits character sets in implementations
09:18:04 [nigel]
pal: This is a document suggestion not an implementation restriction
09:18:20 [nigel]
glenn: this is defined in Unicode and is not in scope of TTML
09:18:40 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #tt
09:25:17 [tmichel]
tmichel has joined #tt
09:30:54 [nigel]
glenn: some languages require not just specific fonts but also rendering rules that are not necessarily embedded in an Opentype font, e.g. Indic.
09:33:34 [nigel]
glenn: W3C i18n may have a view here.
09:34:47 [tm]
tm has joined #tt
09:36:08 [glenn]
http://www.w3.org/TR/its20/
09:39:04 [nigel]
glenn: internationalisation work has been considered in separate forums both within W3C and Unicode.
09:39:19 [nigel]
pal: this application is specific to subtitles and captions and may therefore be slightly different.
09:41:10 [nigel]
issue-295: action on glenn and pierre to consult richard ishida - is there a baseline to reference, or an external source?
09:41:10 [trackbot]
Notes added to issue-295 Remove code point restrictions from IMSC.
09:41:28 [nigel]
action: pal to follow up on issue-295
09:41:28 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-238 - Follow up on issue-295 [on Pierre-Anthony Lemieux - due 2013-11-18].
09:41:36 [nigel]
action-238
09:41:36 [trackbot]
action-238 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Follow up on issue-295 -- due 2013-11-18 -- OPEN
09:41:36 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/238
09:41:44 [nigel]
issue-238
09:41:44 [trackbot]
issue-238 -- smpte:backgroundImage -- open
09:41:44 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/238
09:44:24 [nigel]
nigel: this is a significant divergence from the spatially scalable nature of TTML independent of rendering plane
09:49:41 [nigel]
glenn: if we implement this we'll have to add specific profile feature designators relating to particular image types e.g. JPEG etc.
09:50:10 [nigel]
glenn: and we'll need to add wording relating to usage, similar to UAX14 line breaking wording - i.e. if needed do it like this.
09:50:26 [nigel]
glenn: we should use a CSS-like syntax.
09:50:37 [silvia]
silvia has joined #tt
09:51:34 [nigel]
issue-238: proposal is to add functionality equivalent to smpte backgroundImage and define profile feature designators for baseline feature and image format types. Also describe usage expectations.
09:51:34 [trackbot]
Notes added to issue-238 smpte:backgroundImage.
09:54:10 [nigel]
issue-179
09:54:10 [trackbot]
issue-179 -- Interpreting the pixel measure -- open
09:54:10 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/179
09:57:32 [silvia]
silvia has joined #tt
09:57:37 [nigel]
nigel: it's problematic to relate pixels to related media objects as there may be none or multiple with different resolutions.
09:57:54 [nigel]
glenn: there's an even bigger problem in that the existing definition of pixels doesn't relate to media objects at all.
09:59:26 [nigel]
... it's defined via TTML 1 8.3.9 as per XSL 1.1 5.9.13 which uses the same language as CSS
10:04:31 [nigel]
glenn: there's been some work in CSS on units and measures
10:05:36 [glenn]
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-values/#absolute-lengths
10:09:17 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tt
10:11:04 [nigel]
glenn: we could state that pixels define a logical coordinate space with a mapping into device coordinates
10:11:14 [nigel]
... we could define a mechanism for defining that transformation
10:12:14 [nigel]
... In SVG there's a viewbox attribute that defines the coordinates
10:12:53 [nigel]
nigel: MPEG states that the track header box in BMFF should have the same resolution as the root extent
10:13:14 [nigel]
glenn: wants time to craft a proposed response. Thinking about using the SVG model of logical coordinate space.
10:13:55 [nigel]
... When we define an extent on the root now that effectively defines a viewbox already so the change may be simple.
10:14:13 [nigel]
... There's extra on SVG in terms of mapping to aspect ratio etc
10:15:36 [nigel]
glenn: we can say if you use pixels and define extent then it means X and if you use pixels without defining extent then it means Y.
10:15:43 [nigel]
... and make a strong recommendation.
10:16:57 [nigel]
rrsagent, publish minutes
10:16:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/11/11-tt-minutes.html nigel
10:17:46 [glenn]
glenn has joined #tt
10:22:18 [silvia1]
silvia1 has joined #tt
10:31:37 [glenn]
glenn has joined #tt