Timed Text Working Group Teleconference

25 Jan 2018

See also: IRC log


Pierre, Nigel, Andreas, tmichel


<scribe> scribe: nigel

This meeting

Nigel: Regrets from Cyril but he asked me if we could cover ttml2#359 and ttml2#358.
... Also thank you Pierre for proposing some issues to cover.
... Today we can talk about the IMSC 1.0.1 implementation report as well, which has just
... had a new implementation added.
... Aside from that we have some other issues I marked as "agenda" and listed on the agenda.
... Any other business or specific points to cover?

Add example fragments and images. ttml2#359

github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/359

Nigel: Cyril sent me a message saying he proposes to postpone working on this until after CR
... because it is editorial only.
... The remaining examples are ttp:profile, tt:animate, tt:set, isd:isdSequence, isd:isd

Pierre: It's fine for me if we defer.

Nigel: I've added it to a new milestone "Post CR1".

SUMMARY: Group happy to defer remaining examples until after CR publication.

Incorporate resolutions of additional TTML1 Issues. ttml2#358

github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/358

Nigel: Cyril says the unchecked boxes are those issues that he does not know how to progress.
... Particularly he wants to know how to progress in TTML2.

Pierre: I can provide commit hashes if that would help, for the TTML1 fixes.

Nigel: My guess is that he's looked at them and thinks there may be some differences in
... TTML2 vs TTML1.
... However I think they're all the same.

Pierre: Yes. I'm happy to go through this and check the PRs and provide suggestions.

Nigel: Thank you!

SUMMARY: @palemieux to provide more information on the current unchecked ttml1 issues listed here.

Pierre: I will also go through the list and make sure it is complete.

group: [Pierre, Nigel and Andreas] agree that separate tracking issues would have made this easier to deal with than a single umbrella issue.

IMSC 1.0.1 CR Exit

Nigel: Thanks Thierry for updating the IMSC 1.0.1 Implementation report based on input
... from BaseX and IRT.

Thierry: I did test against the test suite for the new implementation. The exit criteria do not
... require any presentation output, and this tool does not provide any, so that is okay.

Andreas: If you manipulate for example the itts:fillLineGap so that it is not valid then you
... should find that the implementation reports an error and links to the spec place where
... it is defined.

Thierry: The main question is if the issue is enough to satisfy the exit criteria, and the way I read it, it is.

Nigel: +1

IMSC 1.0.1 Implementation Report

Nigel: Reviewing the CR exit criteria:
... "For this specification to exit the CR stage, at least 2 independent implementations of every feature defined in this specification but not already present in [IMSC1] need to be documented in the implementation report."
... That's done.
... Also:
... "The implementation report is based on implementer-provided test results for the exit criteria test suite. "

Thierry: I'm satisfied that this is done.

Nigel: In that case what do we do now?

Thierry: Andreas, are you comfortable telling the group that you have provided a new implementation?

Andreas: Of course yes

Nigel: It's also in the minutes from this here meeting!
... What do we need to do now?

Thierry: We need a transition request resolution, an updated PR draft and request transition
... to the Director.

Nigel: Are you able to create the PR draft in the next couple of weeks?

Pierre: There are some pull requests to merge. I'd like to propose that we handle any
... new issues on IMSC in IMSC 1.1 unless they're fatal.

Thierry: I wasn't aware of that - yes they need to be merged first.

PROPOSAL: Request transition to Proposed Recommendation of IMSC 1.0.1 when all the open issues have been closed.

Pierre: None of the pull requests are substantive, they are all clarifications.

Nigel: Looking at the open pull requests:

IMSC 1.0.1 Pull Requests

Nigel: There are 5, the most recent opened 3 days ago. They all have approvals.
... Are there any open issues without pull requests.

Pierre: Issues 254 and 253.

Should UTF-8 'as specified in' point to the Encoding spec? imsc#253

Nigel: We asked for feedback within 2 weeks, 15 days ago.
... I propose to mark this as WR-commenter-no-response.

RESOLUTION: Mark this as WR-commenter-no-response.

github-bot, end topic

What fillLineGap does/ affects #254

github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/254

Pierre: This one is marked commenter no response already.

Thierry: It's okay to close this and I'll pick it up via the labels.

github-bot, end topic

IMSC 1.0.1 CR Exit

RESOLUTION: Request transition to Proposed Recommendation of IMSC 1.0.1 when all the open issues have been closed.

PROPOSAL: Defer any further issues raised against IMSC 1.0.1 to IMSC 1.1 unless the WG considers them to be fatal.

Thierry: I think it's fair

RESOLUTION: Defer any further issues raised against IMSC 1.0.1 to IMSC 1.1 unless the WG considers them to be fatal.

Thierry: The good news is that we should have finalised this before rechartering, so that would be one deliverable that is not needed in our new Charter.

Nigel: Strictly it wasn't in the old Charter, it is a maintenance release of IMSC that is in the old Charter.
... And we will continue to maintain IMSC in the new Charter.

Thierry: I will start to prepare the transition request - once I have the draft from Pierre
... with the edits then if it's okay I will request transition, which should be straightforward.

Nigel: I've opened imsc#310 for you to do that Thierry.

Clarify tts:fontSize semantics ttml1#301 (pull request)

Pierre: Glenn has raised comments on this to make it more similar to TTML2 but the
... pull request has already been approved.

Nigel: I think Glenn's requested changes look okay, even if they're not particularly an
... improvement.

Pierre: One option is to make Glenn's changes, another is to merge regardless.

Nigel: A third is to minimise the deltas relative to TTML2 by changing TTML2 to match this.

Pierre: Glenn's comment at https://github.com/w3c/ttml1/pull/301#pullrequestreview-86560883
... seems to differ from his later one at https://github.com/w3c/ttml1/pull/301#pullrequestreview-90286536

Andreas: Can we resolve to make the changes corresponding to Glenn's existing comments
... and then any further changes require new issues?

Nigel: I think so.
... If there are any issues after merging then they can be raised later.

Built version of this pull request

<pal> https://github.com/w3c/ttml1/pull/301#discussion_r162796091

Pierre: There's a duplication in TTML2 ED of the text about relative resolution of percentage
... font sizes, which is both in the paragraph text and in the table row about percentages.
... I'm not happy to put the same duplication in TTML1.

Nigel: Okay, you should point that out on the comment.

Pierre: Did we remove styles on tt?

Nigel: We agreed to.

Pierre: Then the text about referenced styled ancestor element is no longer needed.
... In TTML1 it can only be region element. I was trying to keep it close to TTML1.
... The text "If not tt element..." in TTML2 is no longer relevant.

Nigel: That's fair enough, not to add that TTML2 text to TTML1.

Andreas: Because the nearest ancestor element will always be the parent, yes?

Pierre: yes

Nigel: I think the first change can be minimised to introducing the word "computed" so
... it says "relative to parent element's computed font size"

Andreas: I think the current pull request text is fine and the proposed text by Glenn does not really help.

Pierre: I generally tried to keep things the same as TTML1 so that a diff between 2nd Ed and 3rd Ed clearly shows the trail.
... This is what Glenn also asked for!

Nigel: I think these valid comments need to go on the pull request.

Pierre: On the first comment I can make the editorial change to the sentence, that's fine.
... But reordering will increase the delta relative to TTML1 Second Edition.

Nigel: Since the changes are editorial, we could apply a 3 day rule for the changes relative to the current pull request.

Pierre: [makes changes "live"]

Nigel: After this has built I propose that we approve it and I'll add a comment saying that
... in the interests of closing this, since all the substantive comments have been addressed,
... please open a new issue if there are any further changes to be made.

Pierre: Thank you. This was the only blocking issue on TTML1.

<pal> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/pull/307

Defer to TTML2 for security and privacy considerations imsc#307 (pull request)

Nigel: Reviewing the TTML2 Privacy and Security considerations, I believe that the following
... from TTML2 do not apply to IMSC1.1:
... P.7 Access to Processing State - condition is absent from IMSC1.1

Pierre: +1

Nigel: What about hyperlinking with xlink - is that possible in IMSC1.1?

Pierre: No

Nigel: In that case P.8 does not apply to IMSC 1.1 either.
... So I would call out that those two do not apply.

Pierre: Alright. If you file this under the pull request I can add the section and an informative
... statement that they don't apply.
... Tell me what to write.

Nigel: OK I will.
... [adds to the pull request]

Pierre: I'll implement that ASAP.

Nigel: I'm not concerned by editorial changes to make it read better.

Replacing references from TTML1 to TTML2 imsc#258

github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/258

Nigel: @mikedo hasn't responded here since 5th October.
... There's a proposal with one +1 (from me) to close.

RESOLUTION: Close this issue with no change.

github-bot, end topic

Minimum URI schema support not defined. imsc#157

github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/157

RESOLUTION: WG agrees to close since no action appears to be necessary for IMSC1.1, which references TTML2 for this functionality.

github-bot, end topic

Resolution of relative URI values of smpte:backgroundImage not defined. #156

github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/156

RESOLUTION: WG agrees to close since no action appears to be necessary for IMSC1.1, which deprecates this functionality.

github-bot, end topic

Image profile should permit embedded images using smpte:image. imsc#82

github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/82

RESOLUTION: WG agrees to put this on the backlog for a future version of IMSC.

github-bot, end topic

Yiddish in captions/subtitles imsc#38

github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/38

Pierre: I confirmed recently that Yiddish is present in CLDR.

RESOLUTION: WG agrees to close with no action

github-bot, end topic

HRM should be a processor compliance test and allow different levels of complexity for different use cases imsc#15

github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/15

Nigel: Does Ruby affect the HRM?

Pierre: Each Ruby is a CJK character that is counted in the HRM, it is just a character.

Nigel: Same with text emphasis?

Pierre: Good question.

Nigel: fontShear?

Pierre: That's taken care of.
... We might want a note about textEmphasis. I will file an issue against IMSC 1.1.
... Thanks for pointing that out - they are not part of character rendering.

Nigel: What about textShadow?

Pierre: All styles... (checking)

Nigel: ยง10.5 explicit lists a bunch of style attributes.

Pierre: Yes I was afraid of that, the issue needs to include updating that list. I will do that.

Nigel: If you add those do you need to retest and change the threshold values?

Pierre: No just keep it simple and just add the new styling attributes.

Nigel: That's good because an IMSC1 document with additional styling applied will still
... play in an IMSC1.1 processor, which might in turn have to be slightly higher performance.
... In terms of the issue you're saying that the complexity level is just related to the spec
... version.

Pierre: Yes the profile defines the HRM that applies.

Nigel: OK I can live with that.

RESOLUTION: WG resolves to close this issue.

github-bot, end topic

Meeting close

Pierre: Regrets from me for next week most likely.
... Aside from this ttml1 fontSize issue I think we should be able to go to CR.
... For IMSC 1.0.1 I will work on preparing the PR.
... For IMSC 1.1 we are essentially blocked by TTML2.

Nigel: For TTML2 there has been some progress this week; there is still a lot to do.
... We effectively have around 5 days to close off the remaining issues, otherwise I will
... propose to defer everything else that is open so that we can proceed with CR mid-Feb.
... It would be useful for everyone who considers currently open issues to be blockers to
... resolving to transition to label them as such so that the Editors and the rest of the WG
... are aware and can prioritise fixing them.
... Thanks everyone. [adjourns meeting]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

  1. Mark this as WR-commenter-no-response.
  2. Request transition to Proposed Recommendation of IMSC 1.0.1 when all the open issues have been closed.
  3. Defer any further issues raised against IMSC 1.0.1 to IMSC 1.1 unless the WG considers them to be fatal.
  4. Close this issue with no change.
  5. WG agrees to close since no action appears to be necessary for IMSC1.1, which references TTML2 for this functionality.
  6. WG agrees to close since no action appears to be necessary for IMSC1.1, which deprecates this functionality.
  7. WG agrees to put this on the backlog for a future version of IMSC.
  8. WG agrees to close with no action
  9. WG resolves to close this issue.
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2018/01/25 17:39:35 $