14:53:09 RRSAgent has joined #tt 14:53:09 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/01/29-tt-irc 14:53:11 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:53:11 Zakim has joined #tt 14:53:13 Zakim, this will be TTML 14:53:13 ok, trackbot; I see SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes 14:53:14 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 14:53:14 Date: 29 January 2015 14:59:36 SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM has now started 14:59:43 +glenn 15:00:41 it did for me 15:00:49 on first ring 15:00:59 +nigel 15:01:35 Present: glenn, nigel 15:01:59 Regrets: frans_de_jong, Andreas 15:03:29 tmichel has joined #tt 15:03:58 +??P10 15:04:12 zakim, ??P10 is me 15:04:13 +tmichel; got it 15:04:17 Present+ tmichel 15:04:39 +pal 15:04:49 Present+ pal 15:04:59 pal has joined #tt 15:05:13 chair: nigel 15:05:14 jdsmith has joined #tt 15:05:14 +jdsmith 15:05:18 scribeNick: nigel 15:05:31 Present+ jdsmith 15:06:05 zakim, who is making noise? 15:06:17 nigel, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: glenn (14%), nigel (72%) 15:07:37 topic: This meeting 15:07:39 nigel: Outlines agenda, asks for AOB 15:07:44 group: no AOBs 15:08:04 Topic: Action Items 15:08:13 action-360? 15:08:13 action-360 -- Nigel Megitt to Send liaison request on behalf of w3c ttwg to arib -- due 2014-12-18 -- OPEN 15:08:13 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/360 15:09:16 nigel: I need to chase on this one 15:11:02 action-364? 15:11:02 action-364 -- Glenn Adams to Add paragraph in intro that summarizes changes from ttml1 (comment from tm) -- due 2015-01-22 -- OPEN 15:11:02 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/364 15:12:02 glenn: I'll add this to a later WD but prior to the FPWD add a pointer to the changes document. 15:12:15 ... I don't want to add an editorial summary now because it's too soon. 15:12:50 tmichel: I agree it's not an immediate requirement, for an FPWD. There's no rush to do it today. 15:13:57 nigel: I've moved the due date for this to 17th March. 15:14:38 nigel: The next one is Action-365 - let's discuss in the context of TTML2 issues. 15:15:45 Topic: F2F 15:17:35 nigel: A couple of people were going to discuss hosting options - if you could come back next week 15:17:38 ... that would be great. 15:17:59 nigel: In terms of date, is 9-10 April looking good? 15:19:40 nigel: Folk will need to make arrangements concrete pretty soon, so it would be good to get this 15:19:50 ... fixed in the diary soon - if we can do it next week that would be great. 15:20:45 Topic: Issues 15:21:13 nigel: The basis of the TTML2 review was the snapshot: 15:21:15 https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/tip/ttml2/spec/ttml2-20150114-pre-fpwd-review-1.html 15:22:33 glenn: I didn't intend that we publish that exactly - the SOTD section needs to be modified, and 15:22:39 ... it needs to go through pubrules. 15:22:47 ... Plus there are a number of other changes since then. 15:23:56 nigel: Does anyone want to raise anything specifically on the snapshot, before we deal with the 15:23:58 ... later changes? 15:24:29 tmichel: For the FPWD please could you comment out the two paragraphs following the contributing authors 15:24:43 ... before the copyright section, referring to errata and translation - we add those at Rec level. 15:24:55 http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fdvcs.w3.org%2Fhg%2Fttml%2Fraw-file%2Ftip%2Fttml2%2Fspec%2Fttml2-20150114-pre-fpwd-review-1.html&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fdvcs.w3.org%2Fhg%2Fttml%2Fraw-file%2Ftip%2Fttml2%2Fspec%2Fttml2.html 15:25:10 glenn: The above link gives a diff between the snapshot and the editor's draft 15:25:55 nigel: Pierre raised a number of points - do they need edits before we publish as FPWD? 15:26:13 pal: Not necessarily. I would like to see a plan especially wrt the SMPTE requests. 15:27:32 nigel: So do we need to send a disposition back to SMPTE on our changes relative to their 15:27:38 ... requests, and get their feedback? 15:27:59 pal: Yes, and also it would be helpful for SMPTE to know if their specs have any problems. 15:29:14 glenn: We don't have any obligation to communicate back with SMPTE, though the issue raiser could do so. 15:29:33 ... Also, more philosophically, IMO when another organisation has created an orthogonal specification 15:29:50 ... like the SMPTE D-cinema folks did we don't have any obligation to adopt verbatim 'whatever they did' 15:30:12 ... on principle alone. 15:30:46 http://www.w3.org/TR/jlreq/#handling_of_tatechuyoko 15:30:47 ... It's legitimate for us to have different design criteria, or to think another solution is wrong. 15:30:58 s/.../glenn: 15:31:21 glenn: The link above shows 3 examples of what I've been describing re horizontal placing in 15:31:27 ... an em square. 15:34:07 nigel: It makes sense to have continuing communication with SMPTE with the aim of worldwide 15:34:20 ... harmonisation, so it would be appropriate to respond to their liaison with our disposition. 15:34:43 ... That might be 'yes, we've done X', or 'we don't understand why you want to do it', or 15:35:03 ... 'we've done Y - does that meet your needs?' for example. 15:35:10 glenn: I don't object to sending a liaison. 15:35:57 ACTION: nigel Collate SMPTE issues and draft dispositions and circulate on reflector as a precursor to a liaison 15:35:58 Created ACTION-369 - Collate smpte issues and draft dispositions and circulate on reflector as a precursor to a liaison [on Nigel Megitt - due 2015-02-05]. 15:37:46 nigel: Are there any specific snapshot issues to discuss now before FPWD? 15:37:58 http://www.w3.org/TR/jlreq/#composition_of_emphasis_dots 15:38:03 glenn: I appreciate pal's questions, and I'd like to respond to them. 15:38:11 ... Above is a link that describes emphasis marks. 15:38:28 ... Re tts:position, the use case is to address a couple of issues. One of them was a part of the 15:38:44 ... collection of proposed changes that Sean proposed some time back. One was to support 15:38:58 ... attachment points, from CEA708. The positioning model of WebVTT could be partly viewed 15:39:02 ... as relating to that. 15:39:36 pal: My concern is that we only just got people using tts:origin correctly, but we don't have to solve this right now. 15:39:41 ... I'm generally concerned about complexity. 15:40:04 glenn: I think we need this to address the submitted issues. 15:40:32 ... We can't avoid some increase in complexity. We could omit some features of course. 15:40:57 ... My position is to move forward early and then remove features. It provides more flexibility 15:41:19 ... to see what gets implemented and it makes sure that features are handled in the IPR disclosures. 15:42:02 glenn: Before I publish the FPWD we can register the new points as issues or put Ed Notes into 15:42:14 ... the document or notes for the editor to deal with comments. 15:45:03 nigel: It depends on the nature of the issue. It is important that substantive changes can be tracked. 15:45:11 glenn: I don't mind if things are added as issues. 15:45:37 issue-367? 15:45:37 issue-367 -- Clarify initial value override for tts:textAlign -- raised 15:45:37 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/367 15:45:54 reopen issue-367 15:45:54 Re-opened issue-367. 15:45:59 issue-368? 15:45:59 issue-368 -- The [Construct Intermediate Document] process erroneously prunes empty
elements -- raised 15:45:59 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/368 15:46:27 reopen issue-368 15:46:27 Re-opened issue-368. 15:47:06 glenn: On Issue-367, I had missed in my review that there's language that overwrites an initial 15:47:33 ... value. I want to repeat that it makes IMSC1 incompatible with TTML, so it needs to be fixed. 15:47:53 ... IMSC 1 should not be contrary to TTML1. 15:49:04 ... It violates the process and conformance section of TTML1 and sets a bad precedence. 15:49:38 glenn: I would propose to remove the override of the initial value. 15:50:39 pal: I haven't looked in detail at this - it came from SMPTE-TT. I'd like to understand why this 15:51:00 ... was done. At first glance I'm not opposed to IMSC 1 removing the override but I'd like us to 15:51:20 ... understand. I'd recommend to inform SMPTE, even if we don't follow what they say. It seems 15:51:29 ... like the wrong course of action to make changes without consulting. 15:52:56 ... I think this should be added to the liaison as per the previous action. 15:53:02 nigel: Okay I'll add it to the list. 15:53:08 action-365? 15:53:09 action-365 -- Pierre-Anthony Lemieux to Review change proposal 21 in the light of closure of issue-229. -- due 2015-01-22 -- OPEN 15:53:09 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/365 15:53:16 issue-229? 15:53:16 issue-229 -- Mixed vertical-horizontal progression direction -- closed 15:53:16 http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/229 15:54:08 pal: The starting point of this thread is a SMPTE request, and what's been implemented is 15:54:38 ... significantly different to that request, so I have the same question: why? 15:54:55 glenn: I've always taken the tack that if an issue is filed requesting some feature then we need 15:55:07 ... to look at the intent of the feature and then look at how to support it in the context of TTML. 15:55:27 ... In this case the intent is, in my understanding, is to support ta-te-ch-yoko in Japanese layout. 15:55:50 ... I implemented something that matches real world usage in Japan and Asia, i.e. what I understood 15:56:05 ... to be the intent of SMPTE. So I don't view it as being substantively difference. 15:57:00 nigel: So the question there is: is that understanding correct, or is there some missing set of 15:57:04 ... semantics? 15:57:19 pal: I look at it as not just being to do what SMPTE asked, but to make TTML as good as it can be. 15:58:01 glenn: The proposed solution doesn't prevent the text going outside the nominal line width. 15:58:20 ... Also this is basically the same as how it's done in CSS. There's a lot of latitude here - it leaves 15:58:36 ... a lot of room for the client to determine its behaviour. The SMPTE request and referenced document 15:58:52 ... does the same - e.g. it doesn't discuss the issue of how to alter the line width in the presence 15:59:19 ... of an authored Hgroup that would increase the line width. It's like inserting an image inline 15:59:31 ... with some English text in Word - what should happen to the line width? What about the rest 15:59:51 ... of the paragraph? This isn't discussed. So the request is under-specified and so it the proposed 16:00:03 ... solution. I don't view that as necessarily a bad thing but as something that needs time to 16:00:19 ... progress and achieve standardisation. In some cases it may need to be left implementation- 16:00:20 ... specific. 16:00:35 pal: Glenn, you've made very good points. We should collect those places where there is a 16:01:04 ... divergence and inform SMPTE. SMPTE's response could be one of a number of possibilities, 16:01:08 ... which could help us proceed. 16:03:29 PROPOSAL: publish the TTML2 ED as a FPWD 16:03:43 tmichel: Yes, we can go ahead and do that depending on when the updated version is updated. 16:03:54 ... When the document is finalised then I'll request publication for Thursday. 16:04:28 RESOLUTION: We will publish the TTML2 ED with modified SOTD as a FPWD 16:04:48 glenn: Just to be clear this is the current ED not the snapshot 16:05:27 Topic: IMSC Test Suite 16:05:42 pal: I'll respond to tmichel's email about how the test cases were generated. 16:05:55 tmichel: My main question is: are the features all MUST? 16:05:59 pal: They're all MUST. 16:06:13 tmichel: So all the features required by IMSC 1 are listed there? 16:06:15 pal: yes. 16:06:46 -jdsmith 16:07:12 tmichel: Can we list implementations too? 16:07:35 pal: I am going to try to get people to provide results now the test cases are mainly done. 16:07:39 nigel: [adjourns meeting] Thank you all, we have another meeting next week, same time, 1 hour. 16:07:46 -nigel 16:07:48 -glenn 16:07:51 -pal 16:08:01 rrsagent, make logs public 16:08:09 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:08:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/01/29-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:09:51 s/it did for me/ 16:09:58 s/on first ring/ 16:12:41 s/ta-te-ch-yoko/Tate-chu-yoko 16:13:12 s/being substantively difference/being substantively different 16:13:44 s/so it the proposed/so is the proposed 16:14:15 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:14:15 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/01/29-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:18:31 ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 16:18:32 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:18:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/01/29-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:05:01 disconnecting the lone participant, tmichel, in SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM 17:05:02 SYMM_TTWG()10:00AM has ended 17:05:02 Attendees were glenn, nigel, tmichel, pal, jdsmith 17:10:21 nigel_ has joined #tt 17:16:20 Zakim has left #tt