IRC log of tt on 2020-02-27

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:02:00 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tt
16:02:00 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/02/27-tt-irc
16:02:05 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tt
16:02:13 [nigel]
nigel has joined #tt
16:02:46 [nigel]
zakim, start meeting
16:02:46 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:02:47 [Zakim]
Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
16:03:06 [nigel]
Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/96
16:04:04 [nigel]
Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2020/02/20-tt-minutes.html
16:04:24 [nigel]
Present: Atsushi, Cyril, Gary, Nigel, Pierre
16:04:33 [nigel]
Chair: Gary, Nigel
16:04:37 [nigel]
scribe: nigel
16:04:41 [nigel]
Regrets: Andreas
16:04:53 [nigel]
Regrets+ Glenn
16:05:09 [nigel]
Topic: This meeting
16:05:23 [nigel]
Nigel: For the agenda today we have IMSC 1.2 HR and I will mention the CfC.
16:05:31 [nigel]
.. Also TTML2 2nd Ed CR Tests etc.
16:05:40 [nigel]
.. In AOB we currently have planning for DST changes
16:05:45 [nigel]
.. Is there any other business?
16:06:20 [nigel]
Atsushi: Can we look at the timeline PR on TTWG?
16:06:33 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes, apologies, I should have been in touch with you about that, because I cannot preview it!
16:06:37 [nigel]
.. Added to AOB.
16:06:38 [nigel]
.. Any more?
16:07:20 [nigel]
group: [no more]
16:07:28 [nigel]
Topic: IMSC 1.2 HR
16:07:55 [nigel]
Nigel: I've managed to send the message to Web Security, just before this meeting.
16:08:11 [nigel]
.. Apologies for the delay - this was as discussed last week, but took me a while to get around to.
16:08:37 [nigel]
.. Hopefully that will be okay. I took the cue from Philippe to tell them we don't think anything
16:08:44 [nigel]
.. needs doing, and let them tell us if they disagree.
16:09:01 [nigel]
.. That completes the HR requests.
16:09:09 [cyril]
cyril has joined #tt
16:09:17 [nigel]
.. I don't think there have been any responses.
16:09:48 [nigel]
.. I see that TAG has scheduled IMSC 1.2 review for 2020-03-03.
16:09:58 [nigel]
.. That falls within our CfC review period for publication of IMSC 1.2 CR.
16:10:25 [nigel]
.. The other thing to note is I sent out the CfC for IMSC 1.2 CR publication shortly before this call.
16:10:37 [nigel]
.. I made two proposals not discussed directly last week.
16:11:17 [nigel]
-> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2020Feb/0017.html CfC for IMSC 1.2 CR publication
16:11:36 [nigel]
.. The first is the closure date for comments, which I set at 2020-04-16, as the earliest permitted date
16:11:42 [nigel]
.. being 4 weeks after CR publication.
16:11:59 [nigel]
.. If anyone thinks we should extend that please say as soon as we can.
16:12:11 [nigel]
Cyril: I don't know if we should extend it, but I would like to propose adding a new
16:12:24 [nigel]
.. feature to IMSC 1.2 adding the fontShear attribute.
16:12:30 [nigel]
.. I can make a more concrete proposal.
16:12:35 [nigel]
.. Is that okay within this CfC.
16:12:45 [nigel]
c/CfC./CfC?
16:12:55 [nigel]
Pierre: I think the challenge is that the CR process is still pretty heavy.
16:13:03 [nigel]
.. We can not go to CR until we have all the features nailed.
16:13:14 [nigel]
.. But we cannot also say to hold up CR until all the features are submitted,
16:13:19 [nigel]
.. otherwise we'll never be done.
16:13:30 [nigel]
.. I guess the question for you is what is your drop-dead date to have the proposal in?
16:13:37 [nigel]
Cyril: I can have the proposal in by next week.
16:13:46 [nigel]
Pierre: Then would the feature be implemented or at risk?
16:13:58 [nigel]
Cyril: We implement fontShear today in our renderer. Is the question about browsers?
16:14:11 [nigel]
Pierre: I mean the resources to meet the CR exit criteria, i.e. implementation experience.
16:14:22 [nigel]
Cyril: Because it is in TTML2 already I don't think we need to test anything more.
16:14:34 [nigel]
.. The only question is if there is consensus in adding the feature, and
16:14:45 [nigel]
.. that may come down to "can it be implemented in browsers?" because I
16:14:55 [nigel]
.. don't think we can include it otherwise.
16:15:08 [nigel]
Pierre: I agree. There's an obvious fallback of oblique which is supported in browsers.
16:15:24 [nigel]
Cyril: I am having side discussions with various people in CSS WG to see if
16:15:32 [nigel]
.. we can get the necessary features implemented.
16:15:43 [nigel]
.. The feedback was that implementing lineShear is too complex and not necessarily
16:15:51 [nigel]
.. in line with what other people expect when they do shearing in print
16:16:03 [nigel]
.. and typography. The second feedback is that if they are ready to adjust
16:16:16 [nigel]
.. the specification for font-style: oblique with angle to match our fontShear feature.
16:16:28 [nigel]
.. fontShear is acceptable as long as combined characters are sheared properly,
16:16:38 [nigel]
.. and so are rubys and vertical characters. They are willing to adjust the CSS spec
16:16:47 [nigel]
.. for that. So this means to me that I see a way forward to have better shearing
16:16:59 [nigel]
.. than with IMSC 1.1 shear, and I would like if possible to have that in IMSC 1.2.
16:17:19 [nigel]
Pierre: We have to really make sure it is the right thing to do, and I'm not objecting
16:17:22 [nigel]
.. to the proposal at all.
16:17:33 [nigel]
Cyril: I agree Pierre, and that's why I wanted to propose something for next week.
16:17:44 [nigel]
Pierre: Maybe the proposal is to delay the CfC until next week.
16:19:54 [nigel]
Nigel: As Chair, this is really late in the process. I'm tempted to say too late.
16:20:04 [nigel]
.. The approach for publication that the group agreed on a while ago was to try
16:20:21 [nigel]
.. to meet publication schedules not feature sets, so the implication there is that
16:20:34 [nigel]
.. we should say the feature set for 1.2 is closed and this should be added to the
16:20:40 [nigel]
.. next iteration, which would be 1.3.
16:20:54 [nigel]
.. That's not to say we can't delay 1.2 and add this, but the group should really
16:21:00 [nigel]
.. be aware of the impact.
16:21:07 [nigel]
Cyril: I did warn the group a couple of weeks ago.
16:21:33 [nigel]
Pierre: A real concern following up on what Nigel brought up is that by deferring
16:21:41 [nigel]
.. CR we open the door for other proposals to be made, which might also
16:21:49 [nigel]
.. be awesome, and then we'll never be done. That's a real concern.
16:21:58 [nigel]
.. I'd much rather stick to what we hoped or planned to do initially which was
16:22:10 [nigel]
.. a yearly release, and avoid rushing things at the last minute, where
16:22:16 [nigel]
.. unavoidably we will make mistakes.
16:22:27 [nigel]
.. So Cyril another thing to consider is closing off IMSC 1.2 and immediately
16:22:38 [nigel]
.. starting on IMSC 1.3 with this proposal in the requirements.
16:22:54 [nigel]
.. Then 1.2 makes its way through the process and we concentrate on 1.3
16:23:00 [nigel]
.. and make it really work.
16:23:15 [nigel]
.. In terms of timing, if we start on 1.3 today, in practice it will not take that
16:23:22 [nigel]
.. much more time than if we start futzing with 1.2.
16:23:53 [nigel]
Nigel: Another question for Cyril is if there is a timeline driver that means
16:24:02 [nigel]
.. this feature has to be in 1.2 and cannot wait until 1.3
16:24:17 [nigel]
Cyril: Not specifically, but we want to do the fontShear now. Waiting for 1.3
16:24:28 [nigel]
.. would I think be too late. I understand the timeline impact of putting it in 1.2.
16:24:45 [nigel]
.. The feature I am seeking to add is very minor and already in TTML2.
16:25:16 [nigel]
.. I could propose the PR today within the CfC period.
16:25:24 [nigel]
Pierre: We also would need to update the requirements.
16:25:28 [nigel]
Cyril: Yes I could do that too.
16:26:05 [nigel]
Pierre: I'm concerned about the impact if others think our deadlines for requirements don't really apply.
16:26:15 [nigel]
.. They could come and also ask for new features.
16:26:46 [nigel]
.. We might fall back into the trap we've been in before where we're never done.
16:27:03 [nigel]
.. This is a process issue in W3C, where the latency between Recs is many months.
16:30:35 [nigel]
Nigel: Can I suggest that you think about how hard the requirement is to get it into 1.2 Cyril, and let us know.
16:30:42 [nigel]
Cyril: What is the impact on the CfC?
16:31:06 [nigel]
Nigel: If you really need it in 1.2 then I guess you're raising an issue or objecting to the CfC.
16:31:31 [nigel]
.. Hopefully we can resolve this without too much argument.
16:32:04 [nigel]
Pierre: If we do this, then we are saying we don't really have a process for issuing IMSC regularly.
16:33:29 [nigel]
Cyril: I'm not asking for a delay to 1.2
16:33:43 [nigel]
Nigel: I don't believe a delay would be avoidable if we add a new substantive change at this time.
16:33:58 [nigel]
.. I think it would be an absolute minimum of 4 weeks and it would be hard to keep it that low.
16:34:17 [nigel]
Pierre: I think the unfair question is what delay can the market tolerate?
16:34:41 [nigel]
.. If you were to say IMSC 1.2 is never going to get commercial acceptance unless it has that feature,
16:34:54 [nigel]
.. that's different from saying it would be nice to have but the industry can wait 6 months for IMSC 1.3.
16:35:20 [nigel]
Cyril: I think Netflix would do this: the font feature is interesting but we would not rush into its adoption.
16:35:36 [nigel]
.. Proper shearing is something we would need. I see faster adoption if IMSC 1.2 has fontShear than if
16:35:43 [nigel]
.. it only has the current #font feature.
16:35:57 [nigel]
Pierre: Trying to translate, you're saying that from a Netflix perspective, IMSC 1.2 is not useful,
16:36:02 [nigel]
.. compared to IMSC 1.1?
16:36:17 [nigel]
Cyril: I wouldn't be that strong. We don't have use cases for downloadable fonts at the moment,
16:36:20 [nigel]
.. though it may be useful.
16:36:26 [nigel]
Pierre: Thanks for clarifying.
16:36:35 [nigel]
.. I hear you, I think it makes sense to delay IMSC 1.2.
16:36:47 [nigel]
.. If we go down that path and we suddenly get a bunch of new requirements and IMSC 1.2
16:36:57 [nigel]
.. is suddenly a year away, ...
16:38:01 [nigel]
Nigel: I must admit when I published the CfC I did not realise it might be controversial.
16:38:09 [nigel]
.. I didn't realise this from last week's discussion.
16:39:07 [nigel]
Nigel: Cyril, we need to move on, can I ask that you send the proposal to the group
16:39:12 [nigel]
.. and we'll cover it next week?
16:39:26 [nigel]
Pierre: Please could you make a pull request on the requirements document and I will take care of the rest?
16:39:29 [cyril]
https://www.w3.org/TR/imsc-1.1-reqs/
16:39:36 [nigel]
Cyril: Okay. Is it this document? Oh no that's 1.1.
16:39:44 [cyril]
https://w3c.github.io/imsc-vnext-reqs/
16:39:53 [nigel]
.. This one?
16:39:58 [nigel]
Nigel: Yeah I think so.
16:40:15 [nigel]
.. I think that is the right repo, let's do the details offline.
16:40:21 [nigel]
Cyril: Okay I have it.
16:40:48 [nigel]
Nigel: Before we move on from IMSC, the other proposal I made that we did not discuss
16:41:04 [nigel]
.. was the exit criteria. I copied this from IMSC 1.1 and amended the references.
16:41:17 [nigel]
.. Please check this and let me know if you think anything needs to change there.
16:41:56 [nigel]
Topic: TTML2 Tests
16:42:09 [nigel]
Nigel: Given the time, and Glenn's absence, I propose to move straight onto AOB.
16:42:17 [nigel]
Topic: AOB - Upcoming DST switch
16:43:30 [nigel]
Nigel: Please see https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/103
16:43:50 [nigel]
.. The options are there as comments, please upvote those you would prefer,
16:44:00 [nigel]
.. or downvote any that would cause you problems.
16:45:13 [nigel]
.. Then the Chairs will make a call on or by ... When would be good, Gary?
16:45:25 [nigel]
Gary: next week's call?
16:45:29 [nigel]
Nigel: That works for me.
16:45:43 [nigel]
Gary: Gives enough notice before the change.
16:45:57 [nigel]
Pierre: Looks like a tie on the poll right now.
16:46:04 [nigel]
Gary: The Chairs are tie-breakers!
16:46:10 [nigel]
Pierre: Unless they're split too!
16:47:11 [nigel]
Topic: Timeline Pull request
16:47:26 [nigel]
github: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/pull/98
16:48:01 [nigel]
Nigel: Thanks for this Atsushi, it's a PR to create a page for our publication timelines,
16:48:12 [nigel]
.. which I didn't finish reviewing because I couldn't work out how to preview it.
16:48:36 [nigel]
.. Part of the reason why was because it is from your fork of the repo I think.
16:49:12 [atsushi]
https://ttml-w3c.himor.in/TTWG-2019-spec-timeline.html
16:49:23 [nigel]
Atsushi: Yes. [thinks] I have copied it to here ^
16:49:43 [nigel]
Nigel: Fantastic, thank you, I will review that and add comments, but probably just approve it.
16:50:09 [nigel]
Atsushi: we should merge this as soon as possible and then open issues for corrections.
16:51:17 [nigel]
Nigel: Okay I will approve this so we can merge and then make changes as needed. That's a good call.
16:51:23 [nigel]
.. Thank you. I'll do it shortly after this meeting.
16:51:44 [nigel]
github-bot, end topic
16:52:13 [nigel]
Topic: Meeting close
16:52:33 [nigel]
Nigel: Thanks everyone, we've completed our agenda.
16:52:41 [nigel]
.. Please let us know any agenda topics for next week by Tuesday.
16:52:50 [nigel]
.. I guess we'll be talking about fontShear in IMSC 1.2.
16:53:14 [nigel]
Cyril: I just opened a issue on the requirements, and I'm about to do the pull request.
16:53:18 [nigel]
Nigel: OK, thank you.
16:53:40 [nigel]
.. Thanks everyone, let's adjourn. See you next week. [adjourns meeting]
16:54:25 [nigel]
zakim, end meeting
16:54:25 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Atsushi, Cyril, Gary, Nigel, Pierre
16:54:27 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
16:54:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/27-tt-minutes.html Zakim
16:54:30 [Zakim]
I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
16:54:34 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tt
17:21:41 [nigel]
s|c/CfC./CfC?||
17:21:46 [nigel]
s/CfC./CfC?
17:23:54 [nigel]
s|github-bot, end topic||g
17:24:00 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes v2
17:24:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/27-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:24:47 [atsushi]
s/I have copied/I have temporary copied/
17:25:48 [atsushi]
ah, just wanted to make sure my copy for spec-timeline will not be persistent...
17:28:21 [nigel]
scribeOption: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
17:28:25 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes v2
17:28:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/27-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:29:15 [nigel]
s|scribeOption: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics||
17:29:22 [nigel]
scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
17:31:10 [nigel]
s/ah, just wanted to make sure my copy for spec-timeline will not be persistent...//
17:31:14 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes v2
17:31:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/27-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:31:42 [nigel]
github-bot, end topic
18:04:29 [nigel]
nigel has joined #tt
18:05:16 [nigel]
nigel has changed the topic to: TTWG Teleconference. Agenda for 2020-03-05 1600 UTC meeting: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/99
18:15:48 [nigel]
nigel has joined #tt