IRC log of tt on 2017-06-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:59:56 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #tt

13:59:56 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-irc

13:59:58 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs public

13:59:58 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #tt

14:00:00 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be TTML

14:00:00 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot

14:00:01 [trackbot]

Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference

14:00:01 [trackbot]

Date: 08 June 2017

14:00:56 [mike]

mike has joined #tt

14:01:12 [nigel]

scribe: nigel

14:01:14 [nigel]

Present: Nigel

14:01:16 [nigel]

Chair: Nigel

14:01:19 [nigel]

Regrets: Glenn

14:01:29 [nigel]

Present+ Andreas

14:01:47 [nigel]

Present+ Mike

14:02:12 [nigel]

Present+ Thierry

14:02:26 [nigel]

Present+ Pierre

14:04:35 [nigel]

Topic: This Meeting

14:05:18 [nigel]

Nigel: For today I think the main topics are IMSC, and moving IMSC1.0.1 to CR, and TTML2

14:05:29 [nigel]

.. is there anything else?

14:05:31 [atai]

atai has joined #tt

14:05:38 [nigel]

Thierry: TPAC

14:05:53 [nigel]

Topic: TPAC 2017

14:06:08 [nigel]

Nigel: The draft schedule has us meeting on Thursday and Friday, with Web and TV IG

14:06:21 [nigel]

.. on Monday, and CSSWG on Monday and Tuesday, with a suggestion that we invite

14:06:58 [nigel]

.. CSSWG for a joint meeting during our meeting at some time.

14:07:24 [nigel]

Thierry: Will the CSS WG be around on Thursday and Friday?

14:07:29 [nigel]

Nigel: We can ask!

14:08:35 [nigel]

ACTION: nigel Invite CSSWG to joint meeting at TPAC 2017, with list of topics.

14:08:36 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-497 - Invite csswg to joint meeting at tpac 2017, with list of topics. [on Nigel Megitt - due 2017-06-15].

14:08:51 [nigel]

Nigel: I'd like to get a draft list of CSS features that we would need for subtitle and caption

14:09:02 [nigel]

.. presentation, arising from our work on TTML generally.

14:09:43 [nigel]

Pierre: For IMSC1 the obvious ones are multiRowAlign and linePadding.

14:09:49 [nigel]

Andreas: What about line gap?

14:09:54 [nigel]

Pierre: Yes and that too now.

14:10:23 [nigel]

Nigel: I suspect Glenn and/or Dae will be able to list some Ruby features too.

14:10:48 [nigel]

Nigel: It would be good to have CSSWG issues open for those too.

14:11:03 [nigel]

Pierre: Look at #218 on imsc, which indirectly indicates where there is (not) CSS support.

14:11:28 [nigel]

.. For example rubyReserve and rubyOverhang are not supported in CSS. I think Dae did

14:11:41 [nigel]

.. an initial pass at doing that so it probably makes sense to start from there.

14:11:45 [nigel]

Nigel: Thank you I will do that.

14:12:51 [nigel]

Topic: IMSC

14:13:01 [nigel]

Nigel: What are our next steps to move to CR?

14:13:15 [nigel]

.. Thierry, you collated some wide review feedback this week?

14:13:26 [nigel]

Thierry: Yes, since yesterday I need to do more updates because Pierre has been answering

14:13:36 [nigel]

.. more comments so I will continue to update that wiki page.

14:13:49 [nigel]

Pierre: My suggestion is to run down the list of issues.

14:14:20 [nigel]

-> https://www.w3.org/wiki/IMSC1.0.1_Comments_tracker IMSC 1.0.1 Wide Review Comments collated Wiki page

14:14:49 [pal]

pal has joined #tt

14:15:16 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/224 Clarify whitespace handling when xml:space="default" #224

14:15:24 [nigel]

Pierre: This is trivial, there's not much to be said here.

14:15:49 [nigel]

s/224/244

14:16:03 [nigel]

s/Clarify whitespace handling when xml:space="default" #224/Add diff from IMSC 1.0.0 and update substantive-changes-summary.txt #244

14:16:21 [nigel]

Pierre: I'll take care of that at the last minute like last time.

14:16:24 [nigel]

.. The next is:

14:16:38 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/243 Recommended character sets considered harmful #243

14:17:02 [nigel]

Pierre: I have both a question of substance and of process. This question came out of the

14:17:20 [nigel]

.. i18n and we were not involved in the discussion being filed. Part of the issue is there's

14:17:34 [nigel]

.. been a misread of the specification, folk reading more into non-normative text compared

14:17:48 [nigel]

.. to normative text. My take is that this is a misunderstanding, and I'm trying to find the

14:17:54 [nigel]

.. best way to resolve the misunderstanding.

14:18:40 [nigel]

.. There are two other i18n issues, which fall into a similar category. How do we resolve those?

14:18:59 [nigel]

Nigel: Were they all filed by Addison?

14:19:08 [nigel]

Pierre: One was, the others by Richard.

14:19:44 [nigel]

Nigel: I'll invite Richard and Addison to attend this meeting next week so we can talk through

14:19:54 [nigel]

.. the issues and check we understand properly what their thinking is.

14:20:39 [nigel]

Mike: We could raise pull requests to clarify the language.

14:20:50 [nigel]

Nigel: I agree, that was my thinking, but I'm worried that we might not address whatever

14:21:06 [nigel]

.. caused the misunderstanding, if we don't discuss it and find out by conversation.

14:22:23 [nigel]

Nigel: I think it will be most effective if we find a way to discuss this first.

14:22:47 [nigel]

ACTION: nigel Invite i18n to discuss IMSC 1.0.1 issues

14:22:47 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-498 - Invite i18n to discuss imsc 1.0.1 issues [on Nigel Megitt - due 2017-06-15].

14:23:23 [nigel]

Pierre: In #243 I don't know what clarification can be made.

14:23:35 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/241 Requirement to support certain Code Point #241

14:24:01 [nigel]

Pierre: My conclusion is we can improve the text to refactor the recommendation to use

14:24:15 [nigel]

.. certain metrics with the recommendations for certain character sets. I don't disagree that

14:24:32 [nigel]

.. the current text is not the most straightforward. I'm reluctant to do this in IMSC 1.0.1, so

14:24:43 [nigel]

.. since it is not exactly a blocker I would prefer to defer it to IMSC2.

14:24:59 [nigel]

Andreas: The text is there and I think it is correct but could be read differently so there is

14:25:10 [nigel]

.. maybe no strict requirement to update it, though it could help to do so. What would be

14:25:27 [nigel]

.. helpful is if the reader is clear that the code points listed are not ones for which support

14:25:40 [nigel]

.. is mandatory, so it is just about the metrics. From the text you could read that if you have

14:25:55 [nigel]

.. this code point and render it then you should produce a glyph sequence which is identical

14:26:24 [nigel]

.. to the reference fonts. Maybe the edge case is that if someone has no glyph in the font

14:26:41 [nigel]

.. for the code point then he may nevertheless render it with a substitute glyph. So if the

14:26:56 [nigel]

.. condition is there (because the glyph is being rendered) then the glyph sequence

14:27:30 [nigel]

.. rendering must be identical to the reference font, which is circular because it implies

14:27:34 [nigel]

.. that the code point must be supported.

14:28:21 [nigel]

Pierre: There are two conditions - §7.3 Reference fonts only is supposed to apply when the

14:28:25 [nigel]

.. glyphs are supported.

14:28:30 [nigel]

Nigel: I never understood it that way.

14:28:48 [nigel]

Pierre: The reference font section §7.2 says which code points should be supported. Then

14:29:04 [nigel]

.. §7.3 says "if you're going to support a code point for a reference font AND it is in the list

14:29:49 [nigel]

.. in Annex A" then you must end up with the same result, but it does not compel support

14:29:53 [nigel]

.. for all the code points.

14:30:27 [nigel]

Andreas: Would it be possible to add explicitly a condition that it only applies when all

14:30:40 [nigel]

.. the code points are supported by the font used to meet the reference font requirements?

14:30:48 [nigel]

Nigel: +1

14:30:58 [nigel]

Pierre: I don't think that would be controversial - it is the intent already. I would be happy

14:31:01 [nigel]

.. to clarify that.

14:31:26 [nigel]

.. [adds a note to the issue] I will generate a pull request that clarifies this.

14:32:22 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/239 Clarify "All regions shall not extend beyond the root container" #239

14:32:58 [nigel]

Pierre: There's a pull request open for that.

14:33:09 [nigel]

Nigel: I just added an approval for that (it was wording suggested by me).

14:33:30 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/237 Why exclude hebrew and arabic proportional reference fonts? #237

14:33:41 [nigel]

Pierre: This is an i18n comment. I think we ended up rewording one of the sentences and

14:33:52 [nigel]

.. Nigel you suggested a tweak, so I'm tempted to generate a pull request to use as input

14:33:55 [nigel]

.. to our discussion.

14:34:29 [nigel]

Nigel: Makes sense.

14:34:36 [nigel]

Pierre: I will generate a pull request [adds note].

14:34:51 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/236 Should the character sets be minimum *font* requirements? #236

14:35:08 [nigel]

Pierre: The recommended character sets is worded as an authorial requirement rather than

14:35:24 [nigel]

.. a processor requirement. This occupied a lot of discussion for IMSC 1 so I'm reluctant in

14:35:31 [nigel]

.. IMSC 1.0.1 to change it into a processor requirement.

14:36:01 [nigel]

.. I propose a "won't fix" for IMSC 1.0.1 and add it to the list of things to discuss with i18n.

14:36:12 [nigel]

Nigel: Ok.

14:36:23 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/235 imsc1-all.xsd has a bad pointer for SMPTE-TT schemas #235

14:37:19 [nigel]

Mike: The current IMSC 1 uses the SMPTE 2010 namespace and I'm on a mission to develop

14:37:31 [nigel]

.. some tight schemas for IMSC 1. When I started digging into this I discovered that the

14:37:43 [nigel]

.. backgroundImage wasn't documented until the 2013 namespace, so if you were to try

14:37:58 [nigel]

.. to write a comprehensive schema you would get stuck there. It is trivial of course, as per

14:38:15 [nigel]

.. the email I sent. The question is how to go about addressing this. We could write to

14:38:26 [nigel]

.. SMPTE and note that 2010 is missing backgroundImage, but the answer would probably

14:38:53 [nigel]

.. be to use 2013. Or we could write it ourselves but it would be a little weird to write

14:38:59 [nigel]

.. something in the SMPTE namespace.

14:40:07 [nigel]

.. It would be disruptive to switch to the 2013 namespace because it is incompatible

14:40:10 [nigel]

.. with the 2010 namespace.

14:40:37 [nigel]

Pierre: To Mike's suggestion, we or SMPTE could conceivably create a 2010 schema.

14:40:51 [nigel]

Mike: All we need is one attribute of type xs:anyURI.

14:41:07 [nigel]

Pierre: We either create that one definition and move on, or get SMPTE to write it so that

14:41:10 [nigel]

.. they have control of it.

14:41:24 [nigel]

Mike: There's maybe a hybrid where we ask SMPTE to do it but offer to do the work.

14:41:54 [nigel]

Pierre: Or we could create it, send it to SMPTE and ask them to publish it.

14:44:47 [nigel]

Nigel: This is informative only. [traces through the SMPTE references]

14:47:21 [nigel]

Mike: There's an example in ST2052-1-2010 where smpte:backgroundImage has a URI

14:47:38 [nigel]

Nigel: I see there's a substantive issue here in that the normative specification isn't completely

14:47:49 [nigel]

.. clear that backgroundImage takes a URI, though it can be inferred. Possibly we need to

14:48:02 [nigel]

.. add a clarification to IMSC1.0.1. On the schema, which is informative I'm not so bothered.

14:48:20 [nigel]

Mike: That's why 2013 was done! I think it would be good to clarify in IMSC 1 and offer a

14:49:02 [nigel]

.. proposed update to the 2010 schema to include it. While we're writing to SMPTE we can

14:49:14 [nigel]

.. also ask to verify that it is supposed to be an xs:anyURI.

14:49:40 [nigel]

Mike: I'll draft the liaison to SMPTE, and we ought not to touch IMSC1 until we get an

14:49:52 [nigel]

.. answer back and then there will probably be a follow-up action to modify the spec.

14:51:11 [nigel]

Nigel: [adds note to issue]

14:51:37 [nigel]

Mike: Aside from this issue, the question I have for this group is, if I write all these schemas

14:51:51 [nigel]

.. and post them as a contribution, how do we attach them to IMSC1.

14:52:18 [nigel]

s/1./1?

14:53:38 [nigel]

Nigel: We can just add it to the linked documents we publish. Another alternative is we

14:53:59 [nigel]

.. could create a new repository just for the schemas and link to that. It is much easier for

14:54:04 [nigel]

.. people to use that way too.

14:54:07 [nigel]

Mike: Sounds good to me.

14:54:11 [nigel]

Pierre: +1

14:54:29 [nigel]

Mike: Then it provides a good way to update it in case any changes are proposed later.

14:54:31 [nigel]

Nigel: Agreed.

14:55:08 [nigel]

Nigel: Should we add a new repo?

14:55:25 [nigel]

Pierre: The schemas are already in the spec repo. We could keep it there as a directory

14:55:40 [nigel]

.. and when it feels right to create a repo, do that. We can do everything we want on a

14:55:53 [nigel]

.. separate branch on the IMSC repo and when we're ready create a separate repo.

14:56:03 [nigel]

Mike: I like the first part, maybe we don't need to create a new repo.

14:56:29 [nigel]

Nigel: Okay, works for me.

14:57:32 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/232 Recommend avoiding tab characters #232

14:57:37 [nigel]

Pierre: There's a pull request:

14:57:53 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/pull/242 Recommend avoiding tab characters #232

14:58:09 [nigel]

Pierre: As you point out Nigel, it seems valuable to explain this unusual exception. I also

14:58:16 [nigel]

.. do not like informative text. Glenn seems to oppose it.

14:58:44 [nigel]

Nigel: Glenn says a note would be acceptable but bad practice.

14:58:56 [nigel]

Pierre: I'm happy to not have it, put it in the text or put it in a Note.

14:59:01 [nigel]

Nigel: I prefer to put it in a Note.

14:59:33 [nigel]

Pierre: The text will say "should not use the TAB character" and the note will say that no

14:59:49 [nigel]

.. presentation semantics are specified for the code point.

14:59:53 [nigel]

NIgel: +1

15:00:39 [nigel]

Pierre: [adds note to pull request]

15:00:55 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/228 Determination of the color in leading in tts:fillLineGap #228

15:01:09 [nigel]

Pierre: I left the ticket open because we need disposition comment from the commenter,

15:01:15 [nigel]

.. but we have a conclusion in the group.

15:02:03 [nigel]

Nigel: Where did this come from originally?

15:02:07 [nigel]

Pierre: From the ARIB liaison.

15:03:12 [nigel]

Nigel: I believe that we only need to send a message back to the commenter explaining

15:03:24 [nigel]

.. the disposition, and offering a last opportunity to comment.

15:03:37 [nigel]

Mike: We can send a link to the ED to make it easier, and to the issue.

15:03:39 [nigel]

Nigel: Yes.

15:03:56 [nigel]

Thierry: We don't need to publish a new WD say.

15:05:20 [nigel]

Nigel: We have so few comments here I don't think we need a tool.

15:05:59 [nigel]

Thierry: Yes, I think manually will be good enough. We can use GitHub also, if the commenter

15:06:01 [nigel]

.. adds a note.

15:06:09 [nigel]

Nigel: That's good for i18n say but not for ARIB.

15:06:15 [nigel]

Thierry: So for ARIB we will send an email.

15:07:12 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/227 ittp:activeArea clarification #227

15:07:26 [nigel]

Pierre: this is in the same category as the previous one - we have agreement here, and need

15:07:30 [nigel]

.. to confirm the disposition.

15:07:45 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/226 Create tests for CR exit criteria #226

15:07:53 [nigel]

Pierre: I created the tests, so I think we can close this.

15:08:58 [nigel]

Nigel: Can we review what the exit criteria actually are? They're the same as we used for

15:09:00 [nigel]

.. IMSC1, right?

15:09:06 [pal]

https://github.com/w3c/imsc/blob/4f199de739945656838423d18ff8df6235be4277/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html

15:09:21 [nigel]

Pierre: This has actually been merged into the ED.

15:09:40 [pal]

http://w3c.github.io/imsc/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww-profiles.html

15:10:13 [nigel]

Pierre: It is the same as we used in IMSC1 but only applying to new features.

15:10:35 [nigel]

Thierry: Looks good to me.

15:10:40 [nigel]

Nigel: The implementation report is a wiki page.

15:10:44 [nigel]

Pierre: Like for IMSC1.

15:11:05 [nigel]

Nigel: The Exit Criteria Test Suite is a 404.

15:11:47 [nigel]

Pierre: Yes that is because github.io won't let you browse directories - it needs to point to

15:11:51 [pal]

https://github.com/w3c/imsc/tree/4f199de739945656838423d18ff8df6235be4277/imsc1/spec/exit-criteria-tests

15:12:17 [pal]

https://github.com/w3c/imsc/tree/master/imsc1/spec/exit-criteria-tests

15:13:07 [nigel]

Pierre: That directory has TTML files and PNGs.

15:13:47 [nigel]

Nigel: And the examples match what is in the spec for fillLineGap.

15:13:54 [nigel]

Thierry: And there are just two.

15:14:11 [nigel]

Pierre: I think that is sufficient for this particular case.

15:14:14 [nigel]

Thierry: Yes.

15:14:28 [nigel]

Pierre: Especially since the fillLineGap test is pretty gnarly.

15:14:31 [nigel]

Nigel: Agreed.

15:14:47 [nigel]

Nigel: Any other comments?

15:14:51 [nigel]

group: [silence]

15:15:17 [nigel]

Nigel: Okay that's a decision to accept those proposed CR exit criteria and test suite.

15:15:24 [nigel]

Thierry: If we need more tests we can add them later.

15:15:32 [nigel]

Pierre: [closes issue]

15:15:51 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/221 Attribute syntax definition: missing spaces #221

15:16:06 [nigel]

Pierre: This is contingent on whether or not spaces are allowed alongside delimiters in

15:16:19 [nigel]

.. tts:fontFamily. I think we are getting close to a resolution, so when we get there I will

15:16:29 [nigel]

.. generate a pull request for IMSC1.

15:16:38 [nigel]

.. I have not seen any comments back on the reflector about this issue.

15:16:42 [nigel]

Nigel: Me neither.

15:17:11 [nigel]

Pierre: And Nigel and Glenn prefer option 2 so I think we will go with that.

15:17:32 [nigel]

Nigel: If we have not had any more comments by this time next week shall we just go with

15:17:36 [nigel]

.. that option?

15:18:11 [nigel]

Pierre: Yes.

15:18:37 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/212 Copy referenced schema to the schema directory for ease of validation #212

15:19:06 [nigel]

Pierre: We are waiting on you for this Nigel. The last I heard you were going to give it a try.

15:19:55 [nigel]

Nigel: When I tried this I got into all sorts of trouble but I accept that it *should* work

15:20:05 [nigel]

.. without copying the referenced schemas in.

15:20:46 [nigel]

Nigel: [closes issue]

15:20:57 [nigel]

Andreas: [leaves]

15:21:11 [nigel]

Pierre: That completes the review of IMSC 1.0.1 issues scheduled for CR.

15:21:51 [nigel]

Nigel: So the next step is to complete the disposition with i18n and write to ARIB about

15:24:24 [nigel]

.. two issues. Thierry please could you find the usual boilerplate, and send it to Pierre?

15:24:29 [nigel]

Thierry: Yes I will do that tomorrow.

15:24:36 [nigel]

Pierre: I will draft the email.

15:24:39 [nigel]

Nigel: Thank you both.

15:25:19 [nigel]

Topic: TTML

15:26:16 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/384 Appendix R [June 4 ED] is overly constrained and does not represent current best practice #384

15:26:34 [nigel]

Nigel: I'm preparing a pull request for this.

15:28:02 [nigel]

.. I'm concerned that progressive decoding is not always possible.

15:28:19 [nigel]

Mike: My concern is that all of the text in the appendix should be removed, so I'd like to

15:28:31 [nigel]

.. start there, and then if someone argues the existing text is fine then discuss that.

15:28:34 [nigel]

Nigel: That works for me.

15:30:41 [nigel]

Nigel: I plan to add a section referencing ISOBMFF and EBU-TT Live explaining the temporal

15:30:47 [nigel]

.. fragmentation approach used there.

15:31:24 [nigel]

Mike: I would like to take the TTML1 approach out and just reference it as an alternative.

15:32:01 [nigel]

.. Then this appendix is shorter. I know there's a document by Cyril about this.

15:32:16 [nigel]

Nigel: Oh yes that's on github, written by Romain, Cyril and me. We could reference that

15:32:19 [nigel]

.. informatively.

15:32:28 [nigel]

Mike: I'm concerned about how stable that is though.

15:32:54 [nigel]

Nigel: Okay I understand, I'll submit a pull request along those lines for review.

15:33:06 [nigel]

.. I'll put a picture in too, because that's always helpful.

15:33:10 [nigel]

Mike: That sounds fine.

15:33:26 [nigel]

.. And rather than perpetuate the fragmentation mechanism, just point back to TTML1.

15:33:49 [nigel]

Nigel: Okay I'll make some changes and make that happen.

15:35:10 [nigel]

-> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/128 Support for conditional styling. #128

15:35:28 [nigel]

Nigel: I just want to check with you about this even in the absence of Glenn.

15:37:07 [nigel]

.. Is it okay not to be able to conditionally select a region for content based on whatever

15:37:22 [nigel]

.. input parameters are available? I think it might be because the properties of the selected

15:40:23 [nigel]

.. region can be conditionally set without having to choose a whole different version.

15:40:35 [nigel]

.. Otherwise we might end up needing to change the region attribute to IDREFS.

15:40:47 [nigel]

Pierre: I need to see use cases for this otherwise I don't know how to evaluate it.

15:41:04 [nigel]

Nigel: Makes sense to me. The way I'm thinking right now is that using condition to support

15:41:23 [nigel]

.. media queries (screen size) and user preferences (e.g. text size) would be helpful, even

15:41:35 [nigel]

.. in IMSC2 perhaps. But I'm not settled on a firm viewpoint on that just yet.

15:43:22 [nigel]

Mike: I second Pierre's concern here that we need to understand the requirements.

15:44:32 [nigel]

Nigel: Okay I agree that we need to address practical considerations primarily, and I haven't

15:44:45 [nigel]

.. any evidence so far to say that we should make any more changes relative to what is

15:44:49 [nigel]

.. present currently.

15:45:04 [nigel]

.. So I will not open a new issue on this right now.

15:48:10 [nigel]

Nigel: On the issue of foreign namespace elements and where they can go, we discussed

15:48:23 [nigel]

.. it in the context of IMSC 1 and TTML1 but there's no issue for it in TTML2 as far as I can

15:48:29 [nigel]

.. see. Maybe one is needed.

15:48:30 [atai]

atai has left #tt

15:49:10 [nigel]

Nigel: I'm hesitant to raise an issue without checking that there actually is one, in case

15:49:15 [nigel]

.. changes have already been made to TTML2.

15:49:21 [nigel]

Mike: I can do that right now.

15:49:24 [nigel]

Nigel: Thank you.

15:50:05 [nigel]

.. I think we've run out of agenda, a little ahead of time, so I'll close for today.

15:50:10 [nigel]

.. Thank you all! [adjourns meeting]

15:50:27 [nigel]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:50:27 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-minutes.html nigel

16:05:23 [nigel]

s|s/Clarify whitespace handling when xml:space="default" #224/Add diff from IMSC 1.0.0 and update substantive-changes-summary.txt #244/||

16:05:55 [nigel]

s/Clarify whitespace handling when xml:space="default" #244/Add diff from IMSC 1.0.0 and update substantive-changes-summary.txt #244/

16:06:20 [nigel]

s|https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/224|https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/244

16:09:00 [nigel]

s/Recommend avoiding tab characters #232/Discourage the use of tab characters in <p> and <span> #242

16:11:03 [nigel]

rrsagent, make minutes

16:11:03 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-minutes.html nigel

16:14:06 [nigel]

s|s/Clarify whitespace handling when xml:space="default" #224/Add diff from IMSC 1.0.0 and update substantive-changes-summary.txt #244|

16:14:08 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #tt

16:14:18 [nigel]

rrsagent, make minutes

16:14:18 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-minutes.html nigel

16:14:55 [nigel]

s|s/Clarify whitespace handling when xml:space="default" #224/Add diff from IMSC 1.0.0 and update substantive-changes-summary.txt #244|

16:14:56 [nigel]

rrsagent, make minutes

16:14:56 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-minutes.html nigel

16:17:35 [nigel]

s/||/

16:17:42 [nigel]

s/s|/

16:17:45 [nigel]

s|/|

16:17:48 [nigel]

rrsagent, make minutes

16:17:48 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-minutes.html nigel

16:19:15 [nigel]

s|/|

16:19:16 [nigel]

rrsagent, make minutes

16:19:16 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-minutes.html nigel

16:19:53 [nigel]

ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics

16:19:54 [nigel]

rrsagent, make minutes

16:19:54 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/08-tt-minutes.html nigel