15:00:03 RRSAgent has joined #tt 15:00:03 logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/10/10-tt-irc 15:00:05 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:00:05 Zakim has joined #tt 15:00:07 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 15:00:07 Date: 10 October 2019 15:01:09 Present: Nigel, Gary 15:01:13 Chair: Nigel, Gary 15:01:16 scribe: nigel 15:01:25 Regrets: Cyril 15:01:33 Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/71 15:02:08 Log: https://www.w3.org/2019/10/10-tt-irc 15:02:19 Present+ Atsushi 15:02:57 Present+ Glenn 15:03:29 Present+ Andreas 15:03:38 glenn has joined #tt 15:04:00 Present+ Thierry 15:04:18 Present+ Glenn 15:04:27 Topic: This meeting 15:04:56 Nigel: Today's focus is on getting Horizontal Review going, particularly for TTML2 and IMSC 1.2 15:05:12 atai2 has joined #tt 15:05:24 .. Any other business? 15:05:37 Glenn: Query re process matter regarding TTML2 2nd Ed, related to the HR. 15:05:48 Nigel: OK let's raise that in the TTML2 HR agenda item 15:05:59 .. any others? 15:06:05 group: [no other business] 15:06:22 Topic: TTML2 Horizontal Review process on the ED 15:06:46 Glenn: I was reviewing the process document §6.7.2 about revising a Rec 15:07:07 https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#revised-rec 15:07:16 -> https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#revised-rec §6.7.2 Revising a Recommendation 15:07:39 Glenn: I was noting that from what I can tell, just above it in §6.7 it shows a drawing, that if a substantive 15:07:55 .. change is being made to a Rec with no new features then it can go to CR directly, maybe with Director's approval, 15:08:08 .. without going to WD. 15:08:38 .. A WG may request publication of a CR without passing through earlier maturity levels but do need to pass WR 15:08:46 .. I want to verify that is the process we will use. 15:08:56 Nigel: That was my expectation, yes. 15:09:15 Present+ Pierre 15:09:28 Glenn: I should change the milestone to say CR instead of FPWD. 15:09:32 Nigel: Yes, you probably should. 15:09:47 Glenn: I've heard some numbers bandied about for timelines for HR and some sounded outlandish to me. 15:09:53 .. Is there anything written down? 15:11:26 Nigel: It's in our new Charter. that we cannot plan for entering CR less than 3 months after beginning HR. 15:11:38 .. It is possible to move on if all the HR groups come back quickly I think. 15:11:51 Atsushi: We do plan for continual engagement with the HR groups. 15:12:13 Glenn: Particularly because we are not having FPWD, and we are going to CR to start with, and we have only a 15:12:29 .. small number of substantive changes, maybe we can encourage our reviewers in HR to take less than 3 months to 15:12:31 .. do their work. 15:13:56 Nigel: The Charter doesn't say anything about _how_ the CR was entered, i.e. where from, it's the same Rec -> CR as 15:13:58 .. FWPD -> CR 15:14:07 Glenn: So I should be moving to prepare a CR document. 15:15:37 https://w3c.github.io/ttml2/ttml2-changes.html 15:15:51 Nigel: We will need that but not yet, we should first look at the list of changes updated earlier today. 15:16:20 Glenn: On this changes document I only included 1st Ed Rec -> the current ED, and only included the 15:16:41 .. substantive changes. I separated them into syntactical changes and semantic (only) changes. 15:16:52 .. The ones that affect syntax and semantics are in the first Syntax changes section. 15:17:12 .. I summarised and somewhat abbreviated the title of the pull request and included a link to the pull request. 15:17:19 .. It is a slightly different format than previously. 15:17:41 .. I was hoping it would allow more precise review of the changes. 15:19:14 Nigel: I think this list is short enough that each HR group will be able to work out what is relevant to them directly. 15:19:24 Glenn: I agree. 15:19:45 Nigel: The mechanism for initiating HR: I had hoped to catch up on that by now but haven't managed to do it. 15:19:56 -> https://www.w3.org/Guide/process/charter.html#horizontal-review Guide to HR 15:20:47 glenn_ has joined #tt 15:20:50 https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#wide-review 15:21:15 Nigel: One question for us is which version of our Charter to use for HR, and given the new one is nearly finalised (I think) 15:21:17 .. we should use it. 15:21:49 -> https://w3c.github.io/charter-timed-text/ Draft TTWG Charter 15:23:09 Nigel: For TAG I will say there is no explainer per se, but that this is a Rec update based on a series of disparate 15:23:12 .. changes based on feedback. 15:23:33 .. The other groups will have their own processes. 15:23:50 .. We will probably need to complete a self-assessment privacy and security section, which I believe is unchanged 15:23:54 .. as a result of any of the changes. 15:24:25 .. The xlink semantic changes would be the closest, but I think we've only made improvements. 15:25:18 .. I think I must have the action to begin the HR process. If I find any detailed documents need to be created then I 15:25:22 .. may come back for assistance. 15:25:59 PROPOSAL: Initiate the Horizontal Review process for the current TTML2 2nd Ed ED 15:26:17 Nigel: Any objections, questions, further comments? 15:26:45 group: [no objections] 15:26:52 RESOLUTION: Initiate the Horizontal Review process for the current TTML2 2nd Ed ED 15:27:18 Nigel: Any more actions associated with this? 15:28:16 Glenn: When do you expect to be able to issue the invitation to review? 15:28:31 Nigel: It'd better be before the end of next week since I'm on vacation for a couple of weeks after that. 15:29:12 Glenn: 15th October? 15:29:18 Nigel: 16th is more likely! 15:29:20 Glenn: OK 15:29:42 Topic: IMSC 1.2 Horizontal Review 15:30:12 Nigel: I think the process is a little different here. We're adding a feature so we need a FPWD. 15:30:41 -> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/pull/496 IMSC 1.2 FPWD Pull Request 15:31:11 Pierre: Yes, annex L has the summary of substantive changes. 15:32:21 Nigel: Right, this pull request makes no changes other than to fix the state to be a FPWD 15:32:28 .. Any changes to the SOTD needed? I don't think so. 15:33:01 .. You changed [[HTTP]] to [[HTTP11]]? 15:33:10 Pierre: Specref wasn't happy. Any one HTTP will work, right? 15:33:35 Glenn: By the way did you update the links to all the TTML2 feature designators that pointed to the non-final version? 15:33:39 Pierre: I think that's been corrected. 15:34:33 Nigel: They look fixed to me, in §6 anyway 15:34:54 Pierre: Yes they've all been fixed. 15:36:33 Nigel: Don't the constraints on #font need to be listed in the substantive changes? 15:36:51 Pierre: That's not what we did in the past, people need to use the redline to see what has really changed. 15:37:15 .. A question though is if that list at the end is sufficient, the combination of Annex L plus GitHub or do we also 15:37:28 .. need a text file with a list of changes? 15:37:47 Nigel: Any views? 15:38:05 Gary: Sounds like that would be sufficient. As long as you can easily find the changes. 15:38:59 Nigel: There's no link to the GitHub changes. 15:40:37 Pierre: I see different levels, [scribe missed, but it was detail levels from summary to github commits] 15:40:46 Nigel: How would a person go about getting the list of GitHub changes 15:40:52 Pierre: I'd look at the Commits. 15:41:11 .. The only reason for that is to see why changes were made. 15:41:22 .. The redline (via the diff service) is the best way to see what the changes were. 15:43:04 Nigel: What I'd like to do here is merge #496, resolve to publish FPWD and request the publication, in short order. 15:43:25 .. Does anyone think that would be a bad thing to do given that FPWD doesn't represent consensus, and our Decision Policy? 15:43:33 group: [silence] 15:43:53 PROPOSAL: Merge #496 and request publication of FPWD 15:44:09 Nigel: Is it true we cannot do this with echidna for the first publication? 15:44:21 Atsushi: Only for FPWD we cannot use echidna so I need to request it. 15:44:32 .. There should be a period for consensus on the mailing list. 15:45:44 Nigel: Yes we can wait to 10 working days for our Decision Policy but I was proposing an exception to that given the case. 15:45:48 Glenn: I say we go ahead. 15:46:06 Nigel: Is that okay Atsushi? 15:46:27 Atsushi: Sorry I actually have no knowledge on that point! 15:46:56 Nigel: It's just our Charter has a Decision Policy and I'm sometimes very strict about it but on this occasion I don't see the point. 15:47:18 Atsushi: I need to record a decision so if a period is stated in the Charter I need to point to some sort of minutes or 15:47:24 .. email to say it is decided. 15:47:46 Glenn: Atsushi, generally it's been my experience that the Chairmen of the group can put the question to the group and 15:48:02 .. if there is no objection then the group's position stands. I have never heard of a case where a team representative has 15:48:16 .. objected over the wishes over the group and the Chairmen. Do you wish to do so? 15:48:24 Atsushi: I just want to get clear. 15:48:40 Pierre: Maybe the easy way out is to go forward with the proper review period but in the meantime we can send the 15:48:49 .. horizontal review groups the ED so we get the best of all worlds. 15:49:07 Nigel: OK that works, good idea, then we haven't broken any policies and can still make progress. 15:49:31 RESOLUTION: Merge #496 and request publication of FPWD 15:49:43 Nigel: This marks the beginning of the 2 week review period, which still stands. 15:49:57 PROPOSAL: Based on the ED, request horizontal review 15:50:05 Nigel: Any objections? 15:50:15 group: [no objections] 15:50:22 RESOLUTION: Based on the ED, request horizontal review 15:50:51 Atsushi: Usually I am asked to give some story to be pointed to the W3C group or other places on the FPWD point. 15:50:57 .. If anything exists please let me know. 15:51:03 s/W3C group/W3C blog/ 15:51:44 Nigel: Would you mind drafting something Pierre? 15:51:51 Pierre: Can I see an example? 15:51:55 Atsushi: I will send you one. 15:52:25 Nigel: I can do this if Pierre cannot - I'm just trying to manage my workload! 15:52:27 Pierre: Me too 15:53:32 Nigel: I would go back to the requirements that we decided to meet for this version and paraphrase those. 15:54:05 Nigel: I will raise an action on the ttwg repo for Atushi to raise the request to publish FPWD and we can discuss the 15:54:10 .. contents of the request on that issue. 15:54:30 Atsushi: I will do that. 15:55:18 Nigel: From the perspective of HR, the changes are minimal so I'm expecting a quick review from most groups. 15:56:01 Topic: TTWG Charter status update 15:56:21 Atsushi: The W3C Strategy issue was closed for this, but I have no other information from plh 15:57:33 Topic: Upcoming meetings 15:57:53 Nigel: I have regrets for the next 3 meetings. Can I suggest that the meetings go ahead with a different Chair? 15:58:07 Gary: I can probably chair next week but I'm out for the one after because of Demuxed. 15:58:50 Nigel: We're looking at cancelling 24th October then, can you do 31st? 15:58:55 Gary: Yes I can probably make it. 15:58:58 Nigel: Thank you! 15:59:36 Nigel: Thanks everyone, we're done for today! [adjourns meeting] 15:59:42 rrsagent, make minutes v2 15:59:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/10/10-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:03:55 atai2 has left #tt 16:24:56 scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 16:24:58 rrsagent, make minutes v2 16:24:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/10/10-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:35:31 Zakim has left #tt