See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: nigel
<cyril> regrets from me
Nigel: Today we have TTWG
Charter, TTML1 3rd Ed CR, a couple of issues on TTML2,
... request to transition IMSC 1.1 to CR, and I think Dave
Singer sent something to say he
... wanted to record the resolution to publish WebVTT as CR
today.
... Anything else for the agenda?
Thierry: The different version of
IMSC 1.0.1 CR + PR plus IMSC 1.1 FPWD were fixed in place
... to have the correct W3C Document licence.
Nigel: Thank you!
<tmichel> [1] IMSC 1.0.1 CR https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/CR-ttml-imsc1.0.1-20170713/
<tmichel> [2] IMSC 1.0.1 PR https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/PR-ttml-imsc1.0.1-20180227/
<tmichel> [2] IMSC 1.1 FPWD https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-ttml-imsc1.1-20171017/
Pierre: There's a pull request on respec.js to fix that bug waiting for your approval Philippe.
group: [nothing else for the agenda]
Nigel: I just received an email
from Coralie notifying AC and Chairs that the TTWG
charter
... has been extended by 2 months until 31 May 2018.
Nigel: I think the SOTD has been updated.
Pierre: The CR branch is ready to go modulo an update to the publication date.
<tmichel> https://rawgit.com/w3c/ttml1/TTML1-3ED-CR1-build/index.html
Pierre: You can use the head of that branch or I can generate it for whoever needs it.
Nigel: What do we do next to
close this off? We made the transition request already,
and
... have made the change to the SOTD.
Philippe: You want to proceed to CR before the tests have been written?
Nigel: Yes
Philippe: Then you should reply to the last email to say exactly that.
Nigel: I will do that.
... If he says "yes" then when would the exit date be?
Philippe: If he says yes, you've
passed the review period so the document could be
published
... on Tuesday.
Thierry: Looking at the SOTD we
have added that we need two implementations and have
... linked to the implementation report. Should we emphasise
focus only on testing what
... we have added in that edition? The statement seems unclear
to me, maybe that the
... implementation will address only the changes made in this
edition report.
Pierre: The changes are already listed.
Thierry: I want to emphasise that
the focus is restricted.
... Add something like the implementation report will be
restricted only to the changes
... introduced in the 3rd edition.
Pierre: Sure, I can write that
up.
... I'll do that as soon as possible.
Nigel: If we publish on Tuesday then when is the earliest exit date?
Thierry: We should have at least a month, so May 15th, say.
Philippe: May 29 for the PR, if you send the transition request on May 22. So deadline for
<plh> https://w3c.github.io/spec-releases/milestones/?cr=2018-04-17
Philippe: comments would be May 15.
Nigel: Great, so May 15 is the
date to put in the SOTD, thank you.
... Pierre, when you tell me that's fixed in the SOTD then I'll
respond re the transition request.
Nigel: We already made a resolution to request transition to CR:
Resolution to request transition to CR
Nigel: That resolution requires
us to have resolved the issues open at that time.
... Have they been resolved?
Pierre: All the issues
outstanding at that point have been closed and resolved.
... There are 3 issues outstanding on IMSC 1.1. Two are purely
editorial and can be safely
... deferred to post-CR, and are related, making a table easier
to read.
... There's another issue I found yesterday, and I suspect
there will be more. The question
... is do we publish a new WD today or a CR today? I think
publishing a CR is a much
... clearer indication of the state of the document so I'd
rather go with that and a second CR.
... I'd still recommend proceeding with a CR1.
Nigel: Can we fix the issue in the next week or so?
Pierre: Probably. It's implementation experience.
Nigel: How substantive is it?
Pierre: Pretty minor, but substantive.
tts:position should be allowed on region only imsc#366
Pierre: I don't expect the scope of IMSC 1.1 to change, or major features to be added or removed.
Nigel: Seems like the thing to do
is to move to CR on the basis of the resolution we already
made.
... Any other views?
Glenn: No objection.
Nigel: In that case I'm going to
declare that we have consensus to request transition.
... Thierry, please could you prepare the transition
request?
Thierry: Okay.
Nigel: Anything else on IMSC?
Pierre: No, but I'm waiting for respec to be fixed so I can update the document licence.
Nigel: We have 3 issues and pull requests marked as Agenda.
github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/704
Nigel: The question here is if
there is any use case or requirement for conditionalising
the
... tt element itself? I think Glenn and I agree that it is not
needed. I just wanted to check if
... there are any other views.
Glenn: Note that condition is
still permitted on the body element, so some of the
possible
... use cases for conditionalising tt are still possible using
that..
Nigel: Just to check, if we put
condition on body does that imply that there can be more
than
... one body element, and that one must be selected prior to
validation? How would that work with an XSD validator?
Glenn: No, there would only be one, and it could merely be excluded or included.
Nigel: Oh I see, harsh, but that works!
Glenn: Can I mark this as discussed and agreed?
Nigel: I think so, yes.
SUMMARY: WG agrees to implement this issue, noting that body element can still be conditionally excluded.
Nigel: I will approve the pull request then.
github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/699
Glenn: Apparently we had a
discrepancy between the schema and the spec in regard to
the
... "paced" value of the calcmode. There was incorrect and
incomplete schema support that
... wasn't mentioned in the spec. There was never any
discussion or proposal to exclude it
... so my conclusion was that it was not intended to be
excluded and it needs to be fixed
... in the schema and added to the spec.
... If it turns out there are insufficient implementations then
we could remove it.
... I plan to add a pull request to make the animation features
more functionally oriented
... than syntactically oriented. We need one targeting paced
and spline modes. That leaves
... two other modes, linear and discrete. Linear is the
default, discrete turns it into the same
... as set semantics with multiple entries.
... If you're going to support animate at all you should
definitely support linear mode, and
... there's no harm in requiring support for discrete at all
since we already have it via set.
... My thinking is that the default feature identifier should
translate to mandatory support
... for linear and discrete, however the other two, paced and
spline add a fair amount of
... additional complexity and attributes so I think they should
have their own feature designators.
... Key times is required by both, and key splines by spline
mode only. I plan to open another
... pull request to orient along those latter two.
Nigel: You said non-discussion
implied not excluding, but you could just as well say
that
... non-discussion meant non-inclusion.
Glenn: It looks like an accidental exclusion not an intentional one.
Nigel: I think we only reviewed
the spec in front of us. But let's not dwell on it.
... Anyhow does anyone have any views about introducing paced?
It seems like good functionality to me.
group: [no further views]
Glenn: Does anyone object to adding the feature designators for paced and spline?
Nigel: Seems like a good idea to me.
group: [no objections]
Glenn: I've already implemented validation.
RESOLUTION: Add paced calcmode and feature designators for paced and spline calcmodes.
github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/675
Glenn: I would be happy to add
normative language that documents the semantics that I
... think we want to enforce, which is that the entirety of a
font resource, downloaded or not,
... must be available at presentation time to be used or hold
that it exists for the purpose of use,
... in terms of evaluating a list of font families that are
specified by the author in the fontFamily
... property. Right now XSL and TTML say nothing about what
should be done by an
... implementation in terms of loading either locally or
remotely available fonts and use
... during the presentation but there is a presentation I think
by the authors and implementers
... that if you are going to use a font then it had better be
available, or you should move on
... down the list. Right now that behaviour is implementation
defined because it is not defined
... in XSL and not really in CSS either.
... The CSS language may have some relevance to incremental
redisplay or relayout in browsers.
Nigel: I think that's bypassing
the issue though, what happens if the font becomes
available
... part way through the presentation?
Glenn: That's implementation
dependent.
... Right now there's no backup from the spec. If eventually
every implementation uses
... lazy loading, then maybe we could say something in the
future about it, but I still think
... it is in the domain of implementation choices and goes down
into the details we should
... not be talking about in my opinion. There are a lot of
other ways to optimise implementation
... without spec support, for example rendering text to pixels
prior to its use.
Nigel: Okay, any other views about this? I think it could impact CSS based renderers like imsc.js.
Pierre: I haven't looked at this
at all. Today imsc.js just copied tts:fontFamily to the
CSS
... style and lets the CSS implementation do whatever it does.
I don't see that changing.
... I've not run into this issue and noone has complained about
it so far. My inclination would
... be to leave it as an implementation detail until somebody
runs into a problem.
... One option would be to do nothing now but if it comes up
then come back to this issue.
Glenn: We can always close it and mark as ttml.next for posterity.
SUMMARY: Take no action for now, mark as ttml.next and close.
github-bot, end topic
Pierre: There's one pull request awaiting your review...
Nigel: Okay I'll look at
it.
... Thank you!
Pierre: Similarly #16
Nigel: Ah yes, you're answer https://github.com/w3c/imsc-vnext-reqs/pull/16#discussion_r179027816 seems reasonable.
Pierre: Okay I'll make a
clarification change.
... I went back and looked at the Netflix submission on
Japanese required features.
... It said only rubyReserve="auto" was required. It seems that
this was never really implemented
... in the requirements, so I've asked Cyril to review it. The
impact is that at some point
... down the line for IMSC 1.1 we may want to constrain that
feature. I don't see that as a
... major issue.
Nigel: There are two ways it
could go: either nobody uses the other values, so there's
no
... problem applying the constraint, or other values are used,
in which case we should not
... impose the additional constraint.
Pierre: To Cyril's point, the
risk is that in order to support rubyReserve="auto" you
already
... have to support two of the underlying key words.
... Anyway I'm waiting for Cyril's opinion on that.
Nigel: Is that all on IMSC vNext reqs?
Pierre: We have to decide as a
group if when v1.0.1 becomes a Rec we obsolete IMSC 1.
... It makes it easier for the W3 team to implement the
obsoletion if it is part of the Rec
... transition.
... My recommendation is, because IMSC 1.0.1 is completely
compatible with IMSC 1 by design
... and clarifies some IMSC 1 ambiguities then we should
obsolete IMSC 1.
PROPOSAL: When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as Obsolete
Glenn: Question: I think Superceded is an option as well as Obsoleted. Which do you plan to use?
Thierry: Superceded is
replacement of a spec by another, so that's probably the one we
should use.
... Obsolete is a spec you don't want people to implement any
more.
Nigel: Sounds like Superceded is for us here.
Pierre: Yes I like that better.
PROPOSAL: When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as Superseded
Glenn: I think that's what was meant in the first place.
Pierre: I'm reading the Process
document...
... I don't think we want anyone to implement IMSC 1 at this
point. I think I'd always say
... always use IMSC 1.0.1
Glenn: That means it's superseded. Obsolete means we don't have a substitute for it.
Nigel: The Process says "A Superseded Recommendation is a specification that has been replaced by a newer version that the W3C recommends for new adoption. "
W3C Recommendation description in the Process
RESOLUTION: When publishing IMSC 1.0.1 Rec, mark IMSC 1 as Superseded
Nigel: The WBS for IMSC 1.0.1 has
closed, with no votes against. When can we expect a
... transition to Rec to be requested by the Director?
Thierry: I will have to check.
Pierre: Can you share with the WG for the record, as Chair, what the plan is for CR transition? The folks at Movielabs want to know.
Nigel: I'm going to duck that -
the Chairing responsibilities split that we have agreed is
that
... Dave Singer looks after WebVTT and I look after the
TTML-based work, so I can't and don't want
... to speak for him.
Thierry: Are you referring to the pull request about the relation between the CG and the WG?
Pierre: Yes.
Thierry: That statement has been there for years, I have not changed it.
Pierre: I don't dispute that, I'm paying attention now because it's getting to CR.
Nigel: My expectation was that Dave would join today to record the resolution to transition to CR.
Thierry: I guess the deadline for
publication has been extended along with the Charter, so
... there's a little bit more time.
... The Charter is under review by W3M and then will go to AC.
There's a bit of time there.
... The Charter incorporating or not incorporating WebVTT
should be the final version
... submitted to the AC.
Nigel: Ah, I see, that makes
sense. If hypothetically we thought that WebVTT is not
going
... to be in the next Charter then publishing as a CR would
seem perverse, since there would
... be no route out of CR.
Nigel: Next week, I'm on
vacation, so unable to Chair. If someone wants to Chair
(including
... a Chair of course) then please go ahead.
Pierre: Regrets from me too.
Nigel: Andreas has also sent his
regrets.
... Given 3 absentees I think we should cancel next week's
meeting, so our next call
... will be on 19th April.
... We haven't much time to decide on a f2f - the proposal is
to meet in advance of the IRT
... subtitle symposium on 22nd and 23rd May.
Pierre: I would be reluctant to attend.
Glenn: I also would not be able to attend.
Nigel: Okay then it doesn't make any sense to go ahead with that.
Pierre: I'll be in Berlin w/c
July 9, so if we want a F2F in Europe that could be a
possibility.
... The weekend before or week after maybe.
... Week of June 18 I'd be in Toronto, if that would help.
Nigel: Half way could work, if we had a host.
Pierre: I'm just throwing ideas
in.
... Hopefully we won't need to meet in person though, I'm
hopeful we can deal with this
... electronically.
Nigel: Me too.
Pierre: If we want to target July I need to book travel in the next three weeks.
Nigel: Okay let's come back to
this in 2 weeks and see if we can confirm.
... By the way for TPAC I've filled in the survey as any two
consecutive days, avoiding
... clash with M+E IG, and requesting joint meeting with CSS
WG.
... Thanks everyone, next meeting in 2 weeks. [Adjourns
meeting]