15:58:01 RRSAgent has joined #tt 15:58:01 logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-irc 15:58:05 Zakim has joined #tt 15:58:14 Log: https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-irc 15:58:22 Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/83 15:59:04 Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2019/12/12-tt-minutes.html 15:59:10 rrsagent, make logs public 15:59:28 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 15:59:48 present: Nigel 16:00:09 Regrets: Gary, Andreas 16:00:16 scribe: nigel 16:00:25 rrsagent, make minutes v2 16:00:25 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:00:28 glenn has joined #tt 16:01:33 Chair: Nigel 16:01:37 Present+ Cyril 16:01:55 Present+ Glenn 16:02:55 Present+ Pierre 16:03:21 Topic: This meeting 16:04:22 Nigel: Today we have some IMSC 1.2 FPWD Next steps, IMSC 1.1 Errata. 16:04:35 .. AOB includes the rejoining, if there are any questions about that, 16:04:44 .. and next meeting on Jan 9th. 16:04:51 .. Any other agenda points? 16:05:08 group: [no other agenda points] 16:05:18 Topic: IMSC 1.2 FPWD Next Steps 16:05:47 -> https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/87 Request WR for IMSC 1.2 ttwg#87 16:06:02 Nigel: I'm behind on this. I had hoped to get it done earlier today, but haven't managed to. 16:06:34 .. Practically speaking the difference between sending tomorrow or at beginning of Jan is minor, but I will do it as soon 16:06:39 .. as I can make the time. Apologies for the delay. 16:07:50 .. Moving towards IMSC 1.2 issues. 16:08:10 .. Last week we made some resolutions to issues Glenn raised, in his absence. Any points to raise there? 16:08:13 Glenn: No, no input. 16:08:15 Nigel: Thanks 16:08:25 Topic: Potential semantic conflict between ttp:profile and ttp:contentProfiles. imsc#506 16:08:30 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/506 16:09:36 Nigel: The proposal from last week was: 16:09:38 .. Add a normative SHOULD statement to TTML2: The set of features that may be present in the document should all be in the set of features supported by the processor, or generate a warning. 16:10:35 .. This is a proposed requirement for a validator, based on mismatches between the effective content profile and the 16:10:40 .. effective processor profile. 16:10:58 .. If we agree to this proposal then we will move the issue to the TTML2 repo. 16:11:19 cyril has joined #tt 16:12:57 Glenn: It's semantically inconsistent with the definition of processor profiles because only features that the processor 16:13:48 .. profile designates to be required elicits an abort... [thinking out loud] 16:14:10 .. It might never produce a warning. I need to think about it a little more. 16:14:25 .. Offhand that doesn't sound semantically consistent with the current semantics but I'll give it a once-over offline. 16:14:28 Nigel: Thank you 16:14:52 SUMMARY: @skynavga to consider the proposal further 16:15:02 Topic: IMSC 1.1 Errata 16:15:11 Nigel: We have 4 errata proposed, to iterate through. 16:15:26 .. Has everyone followed that there is a new errata publication process. 16:15:32 Pierre: I've looked into it a little bit. 16:17:21 -> https://www.w3.org/2018/11/ttml-imsc1.1-errata.html IMSC 1.1 Errata 16:18:08 Nigel: The document describes the process at the top. 16:18:28 .. Essentially we label errata issues with Errata on GitHub, and Editorial if it is editorial, and the document version, and 16:18:33 .. the errata page will be updated automatically. 16:18:41 Glenn: Will it harvest PR data or issue data? 16:18:52 Nigel: I think it is the text of the issue itself. 16:18:57 Glenn: Sounds like magic! 16:19:23 Topic: #extent-root implies support for #extent-auto imsc#489 16:19:29 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/489 16:21:11 Pierre: I copied the text from IMSC 1.2 which we had agreed to. 16:21:28 Cyril: I'm trying to understand what it means - is it specifying format if a value is specified or is it requiring a value? 16:21:48 Pierre: "specified value" has a defined meaning in TTML 16:22:00 Cyril: I understand, I'm asking if the attribute is required on the element or not? 16:22:08 Pierre: The only way to have a specified value is if it is specified. 16:22:17 Cyril: Sure, but this text doesn't say what happens if it is not specified. 16:22:34 Pierre: If the author does not specify a value then the specified value is undefined, so it cannot be. 16:22:41 Cyril: It does not exist... 16:22:54 Pierre: Exactly, so it cannot be a length expression, therefore it implies it is required. 16:23:43 .. The implication is the only way to satisfy the constraint is to include the attribute. 16:23:52 .. We should fix this in IMSC 1.2 and then port it back. 16:24:04 Nigel: We can agree the words here and do it here and in IMSC 1.2. 16:24:25 Pierre: Absolutely. We can hold off making this change now and come back to it next meeting in case there is a better idea. 16:25:48 Nigel: Simple wording change - add "is required to be present" 16:25:56 Pierre: Folk weren't happy with that previously on the thread. 16:26:09 Nigel: I don't see that here - Glenn's comment on 10th Oct included it for example. 16:26:18 Pierre: I'll point to the IMSC 1.2 issue that was closed on this. 16:26:23 .. It is #475 16:26:46 .. It's a long thread. Suggest Cyril reopens the issue and adds the suggestion. 16:26:49 Cyril: Ok will do. 16:28:02 SUMMARY: Reconsider the wording for this in conjunction with IMSC 1.2 #475 and come up with something all are happy with. 16:28:21 Pierre: Remember we have to be careful about ``, initial value etc. 16:28:38 .. Specify does not necessarily mean it is on the element itself, which is why "is present" is not awesome. 16:28:45 Cyril: Being consistent with oneself is difficult! 16:28:56 Pierre: Thankfully we have GitHub to remind ourselves. 16:29:19 Nigel: We've toyed with trying to work "computed" in here in the past too. 16:29:41 Pierre: Yes, and the reason it was open is that style properties can be specified using child style elements, which is 16:29:50 .. the equivalent of specifying the style property on the element itself. 16:30:01 .. There are many ways for something to be considered specified. 16:31:50 Nigel: I think we're talking about the value of the attribute in the specified style set for the region element, following 16:31:54 .. the style resolution process. 16:32:03 Pierre: That term in TTML2 is "specified style" 16:33:00 .. What I'm saying is "shall be present" is not right because it excludes the example that Cyril raised in #475. 16:33:58 Nigel: In TTML2 terminology section "specified style set" is defined but not "specified style". It may be elsewhere. 16:34:07 https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/specified_value 16:34:09 Cyril: It's an XML term? 16:34:17 Glenn: I would avoid using CSS terminology. 16:34:25 Pierre: 10.4.3.1 in TTML2 16:34:57 -> https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml2/#semantics-style-resolved-value-category-specified TTML2 10.4.3.1 Specified Values 16:35:02 Cyril: Ok can we link to that? 16:35:10 .. I will change my comment. 16:36:02 Pierre: It is actually already there in IMSC 1.2 - specified value already says that under #extent-region. 16:36:07 .. Your wish has already come through. 16:36:17 Cyril: Apologies, I'll delete my comment and close the issue. 16:36:32 Pierre: Going back to IMSC 1.1 do we have to add this link? 16:36:35 Nigel: I think we should 16:36:41 Pierre: I will modify that then. 16:37:45 .. [adds extra text to signify the meaning of "specified value"] 16:38:57 .. done 16:39:05 Nigel: I see that "specified value" is now a link. 16:39:11 Pierre: Shall we approve this erratum? 16:40:05 Nigel: Any objections to approving this erratum? 16:40:19 group: [no objections] 16:40:40 RESOLUTION: Approve this erratum as summarised at https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/489#issuecomment-562895235 16:41:02 Pierre: The text will be taken from the summary, I understand. 16:41:13 github-bot, end topic 16:42:28 Topic: Errata to correct disposition of #bidi in IMSC 1.1 imsc#498 16:42:37 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/498 16:43:25 Nigel: This is one where we're simply applying the disposition already agreed in #491 for IMSC 1.2 16:43:47 .. Any objections to publishing this erratum? 16:44:01 group: [no objections] 16:44:12 RESOLUTION: Publish this erratum as at https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/498#issuecomment-562895537 16:44:58 Topic: Errata on non-prohibition of partially supported features imsc#500 16:45:07 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/500 16:46:14 Nigel: This is one we already added to IMSC 1.2, defining partial support for a feature. 16:46:24 .. Any objections to proceeding with this erratum? 16:46:39 group: [no objections] 16:46:53 RESOLUTION: Publish this erratum as at https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/500#issuecomment-562895784 16:47:11 Glenn: I would not say this helps readers but it does somewhat resolve the ambiguity. 16:47:18 github-bot, end topic 16:48:00 Topic: Incompatible SMPTE ST 2052-1:2013 extension namespace name imsc#512 16:48:06 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/512 16:49:33 Nigel: I did try to ping Mike Dolan about this but he did not respond (on this issue). 16:49:42 .. I think this is super tricky to know what to do without input from SMPTE. 16:50:02 Pierre: The long term decision is tricky. IMSC has used the 2010 version from the beginning. In the short term the 16:50:16 .. right thing to do for internal consistency in IMSC is to update the reference to 2010. 16:50:23 .. For dealing with this in the longer term we need input from SMPTE. 16:50:36 Glenn: TTV did implement it as specified so we would have to go back and retrofit this change. 16:50:53 Pierre: I looked at TTV. For IMSC I think it still uses 2010. It does have a profile for SMPTE-TT 2013 but my reading of 16:50:56 .. the code... 16:51:15 Glenn: Okay I did not go back to verify if the IMSC part uses the SMPTE-TT 2013 part for that namespace. 16:51:19 .. You may be right. 16:51:36 Pierre: I didn't spend hours but my take is TTV supports 2010 and 2013 but IMSC uses 2010. 16:51:41 Glenn: I support the suggested change. 16:51:58 .. I don't remember if this group ever consciously made the decision to use the 2013 namespace. Do you? 16:52:18 Pierre: We never discussed it. When we started IMSC SMPTE-TT was at 2010 so we used it. 16:52:33 .. When we moved to IMSC 1.1 we tried to date all references but in our excitement we didn't check if 2013 was 16:52:41 .. backward compatible with 2010, and it looks like it is not. 16:52:53 .. We need SMPTE to tell us if that was intended or an error within SMPTE. 16:53:04 Glenn: I suspect it was something that wasn't checked. 16:53:14 Pierre: That's why I suggest we revert the reference to the dated 2010 version. 16:53:16 Glenn: I agree. 16:54:20 RESOLUTION: Publish this erratum as at https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/512#issuecomment-562895873 16:54:46 Nigel: Just double checking there are no objections before closing this agenda topic? 16:54:50 group: [no objections] 16:54:54 github-bot, end topic 16:55:27 Topic: Errata publishing 16:55:38 Nigel: We have 4 recorded errata showing up but none of them is actually listed. 16:55:46 Pierre: I will follow this up with Atsushi and Philippe. 16:56:11 Atsushi: Thank you, let me follow up on this. 16:56:17 Nigel: Thank you. 16:57:16 Topic: AOB: (Re-)join to timed text WG after charter renewal 16:57:30 Nigel: I've seen several members rejoining, so that seems to be working okay. 16:58:30 .. Any other issues? 16:58:38 group: [none for now, amongst those present] 16:58:52 Nigel: If you have any difficulties please contact Atsushi or Philippe. 16:58:55 let me write one email to Glenn 16:59:06 .. Also make sure your AC rep has nominated you to TTWG. 16:59:17 Topic: Next meeting 2020-01-09 16:59:31 Nigel: We will not have our regular call next week or the following week after that, so our next call 16:59:38 .. will be on 9th January 2020. 17:03:55 .. I want to take this moment to say thank you to everyone for all the work you've put in over the year, 17:04:25 .. a lot has happened this year. For those having a break, enjoy it, and for those for whom it is new year, happy new year. 17:04:35 .. See you all in January. [adjourns meeting] 17:04:39 rrsagent, make minutes 17:04:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:05:39 rrsagent, make minutes v2 17:05:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:07:48 s/github-bot, end topic//g 17:08:37 rrsagent, make minutes v2 17:08:37 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:13:22 Present+ Atsushi 17:13:36 scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 17:13:38 rrsagent, make minutes v2 17:13:38 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel