15:01:36 RRSAgent has joined #tt 15:01:36 logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/05/21-tt-irc 15:03:02 cyril has joined #tt 15:03:12 nigel has changed the topic to: TTWG Teleconference. Agenda for 2020-05-21 1500 UTC meeting: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/115 15:03:17 zakim, start meeting 15:03:17 RRSAgent, make logs Public 15:03:18 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 15:03:29 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2020/05/21-tt-irc 15:03:43 Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2020/05/14-tt-minutes.html 15:04:02 Present: Atsushi, Cyril, Gary, Pierre, Nigel, 15:04:07 Regrets: Andreas 15:04:15 scribe: nigel 15:04:23 Topic: This meeting 15:05:26 Nigel: Agenda today: IMSC 1.2 intro, ARIB issues, TTML2 IR, TTML Profile Registry. 15:05:54 .. AOB? Or points to make sure we get to? 15:06:15 group: [no other business] 15:06:28 Nigel: I propose we cover the ARIB topics last if that's ok 15:06:45 Pierre: I think the priority should be to close all the issues on IMSC. I'm not really 15:06:53 .. ready to talk about the ARIB topics but we can go over them if we have time. 15:07:15 Topic: IMSC 1.2 Introduction 15:07:28 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/pull/552 15:07:49 Nigel: It feels like what's there now is probably good enough, though I think the main 15:07:54 .. remaining comments are from me. 15:08:17 Pierre: I want to make sure that Atsushi's comment got resolved. 15:08:43 Nigel: Atushi's comment was about the Unicode text wording. 15:09:50 Atsushi: I assume this part wants to mention that this specification should mention that 15:09:59 .. Unicode code points should be used in the encoding but not anything else. 15:10:29 Pierre: To answer that, Unicode is being used maybe not very formally here. To the casual 15:10:35 .. reader Unicode text means something. 15:11:18 Atsushi: I think I should point to some reference here but sorry I haven't. I'm curious about 15:11:26 .. using the word "encoding" here. 15:11:53 .. The actual definition is "code point" in Unicode. 15:12:56 Nigel: Is there something misleading about the current wording "encoded according to the Unicode standard"? 15:13:23 Atsushi: 3 encodings are defined. Encoding is a transformation from code point identifier to byte stream. 15:13:42 .. PUA has no meaning in encoding, it's within a code point of Unicode. 15:14:28 Nigel: PUA is not mentioned, it's something that is understood by experts. 15:14:40 > The Unicode Standard defines codes for characters used in all the major languages written today. 15:14:49 pal has joined #tt 15:15:13 Atsushi: [proposes to say that the document consists of Unicode code points] 15:15:17 Pierre: That's fine by me 15:15:27 Nigel: Is PUA included in that set? 15:15:30 Atsushi: Included. 15:15:53 .. PUA is defined by each party, not standardised with a match between character and code point. 15:16:21 Pierre: I would be really happy to see the exact proposal on the ticket, because that 15:16:38 .. would also allow @vlevantovski to comment. Could I ask you to make a proposal in 15:16:46 .. the pull request for the exact text? That would be great. 15:16:57 Atsushi: Let me do that now. 15:17:35 Nigel: While Atsushi is doing that, I think it's safe to mention that my comments that 15:17:48 .. are still outstanding (thank you for addressing the others), are all about adding an 15:18:09 .. example. I think what we have already is good enough, and a clear improvement, 15:18:28 .. and crucially, satisfies the APA WG issue, so the best thing seems to me to be to 15:18:40 .. move addition of an example to a new issue, and I should try to prepare a pull request 15:18:52 timed text is expressed exclusively using code for characters defined in [[[Unicode]]] (just put into github PR) 15:19:00 .. for that separately. It would be great to do it before IMSC 1.2 PR, but not essential. 15:19:08 .. In other words, it could go to a next version. 15:21:19 Pierre: Atsushi's change is fine with me. 15:21:21 https://glyphwiki.org/wiki/u3110 15:21:27 Nigel: I might have used "character codes" 15:21:33 Pierre: Or "code points" 15:21:57 Atsushi: This U+3110 is a code point defined by Unicode. 15:22:17 .. 3110 is the code point, and this will be transformed into several formed, like in UTF 15:22:22 .. it will be 3 bytes. 15:22:46 Pierre: Understood. How about my proposal "using code points defined in Unicode" 15:22:52 Atsushi: Should be fine also. 15:22:56 Pierre: I will make the change now. 15:23:29 .. I just want to point out that because the only representation is UTF-8 it is true 15:23:42 .. that the only representation is Unicode, right, but you're saying that is too specific? 15:23:51 .. In other words it is not wrong to say it is encoded according to Unicode. 15:24:04 Atsushi: I actually wondered if people would think other encodings would be valid 15:24:13 .. like UTF-16, which is a Unicode encoding. 15:24:20 Pierre: Right, and it's forbidden in IMSC. 15:24:26 Atsushi: I just wanted to be clear about that. 15:24:35 Pierre: [makes the change] 15:24:53 .. Nigel, you will resolve your review comment and open a new issue? 15:24:57 Nigel: Yes. 15:25:04 Pierre: Then we can close this after our usual 2 week period. 15:25:07 Nigel: Yes. 15:25:21 .. Any other comments on the introduction text before we move on? 15:25:43 SUMMARY: @nigelmegitt to open new issue for example, normal PR review to continue. 15:26:02 Topic: IMSC 1.2 PR 15:26:12 Pierre: What's our target for seeking transition to PR? 15:26:50 https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/wip/TTWG-2019-spec-timeline.html 15:27:51 Nigel: I think we deal with all the review comments and then CfC transition to PR. 15:27:58 .. I'm not aware of any other dependencies. 15:28:13 Pierre: So we could start the CfC based on pull #552? 15:28:16 .. I would encourage that. 15:28:56 Atsushi: The Implementation Report is finished I think? 15:28:58 Nigel: Yes 15:29:13 Atsushi: Then it might be okay to begin the call for consensus within this working group. 15:29:21 .. If there are no other remaining issues for this spec. 15:30:00 Nigel: The only way this is going to work is if we decide to make no changes based on 15:30:02 .. the ARIB comments. 15:30:10 Pierre: We can wait until the end of the meeting. 15:30:59 Topic: TTML Profile Registry - addition of RTP profile short code 15:31:08 github: https://github.com/w3c/tt-profile-registry/issues/72 15:31:56 Nigel: I prepared a pull request for this, #73 15:33:06 .. Just wanted to check if anyone has any comments or might have an objection. 15:33:16 .. Otherwise we can do the 2 week review as normal. 15:33:32 .. If anyone can have a look at the pull request and approve it, that would be very 15:33:35 .. helpful for merging. 15:34:02 .. Any objections? 15:34:05 group: no objections 15:34:24 RESOLUTION: Proceed with this pull request under normal 2 week TTWG procedure 15:34:47 Topic: TTML2 2nd Edition Implementation Report 15:35:25 Cyril: I did a verification. 15:35:47 .. I compared the number of files in the repo vs the number in the JSON file. 15:35:56 .. Just focusing on the 2nd Ed the numbers are the same so we should be good. 15:36:05 .. They're different for non-2nd Ed but I don't think it's a concern. 15:36:19 .. For more details, we have 57 files for validation and 14 for presentation. 15:36:47 .. The total is 71 and that's the number in the IR. I will check that they're the right ones too. 15:37:04 .. I added the 4th section for invalid presentation tests. 15:37:24 Nigel: Great, this is good enough for me to add the implementation that I'm aware of. 15:37:27 .. I will do that. 15:37:52 .. We should assume this is now the correct set and obviously if anyone finds any errors 15:37:56 .. please fix them. 15:38:13 .. Now we need to register implementations and verify that we have enough to pass 15:38:16 .. CR exit criteria. 15:38:40 .. Any other actions/comments/questions on this? 15:38:46 group: [no] 15:39:03 Topic: IMSC ARIB issues 15:39:58 Nigel: I went through these and I think Pierre did too. 15:40:12 .. The only one that might result in a change I think is the character sets for "ja" language code. 15:40:33 Pierre: Yes, that's an easy one. Whether or not we do it now, at this 11th hour, I'd rather 15:40:38 .. not but it's an easy and a good addition. 15:40:52 Topic: [WR/ARIB] Character Sets w3c/imsc#544 15:41:00 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/544 15:41:52 Nigel: I think the first question to ask is if this is normative/substantive. 15:42:02 Pierre: We should try to avoid making substantial changes this far into the process, but 15:42:11 .. we could formally because it is only informative. 15:42:53 Pierre: That section, regardless of the normative language around it, is meant to inform 15:42:56 " this section defines common character sets that authors are encouraged to use." 15:43:02 .. implementations. You could conclude that it affects implementations. 15:43:33 Cyril: "encouraged to use" 15:44:16 Pierre: And the W3C Process definition. 15:44:23 -> https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#correction-classes Process 6.2.5 Classes of Changes 15:46:21 Pierre: Section 8.2 says a document "SHOULD be authored using characters from" the common character sets. 15:46:43 Cyril: There's a relationship between the reference fonts and the common character sets, right? 15:46:44 Pierre: Also 15:47:25 .. I think we should deal with these ARIB comments in the next version of IMSC otherwise 15:47:28 .. we may make mistakes. 15:47:46 Nigel: Back to Cyril's point, there does seem to be a substantive relationship between 15:48:40 .. reference fonts and the common character sets and the ยง9.3 text on rendering rules. 15:48:54 .. So it looks as though changing the common characters changes the code points in the 15:49:02 .. reference fonts and therefore the rendering rules. 15:49:23 .. (sorry that 9.3 is assuming the introduction is added, otherwise it's 8.3) 15:49:52 Nigel: My conclusion is we cannot make this change now but should add it to vNext 15:50:02 .. with appropriate care about reference fonts, and checking that the code points are 15:50:04 .. indeed all available. 15:50:44 .. Any other points to add before I summarise? 15:50:56 Pierre: I think that the idea of converging ARIB-TTML and IMSC is really a great goal, 15:51:09 .. and we should take the time to do it in collaboration with ARIB. I see that as a pretty 15:51:14 .. extensive but worthwhile effort. 15:51:47 SUMMARY: TTWG would like to adopt this change in a future version of IMSC. 15:52:49 Topic: [WR/ARIB] (meta) Compatibility with ARIB-TTML w3c/imsc#545 15:52:55 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/545 15:53:06 Nigel: These 5 issues mainly don't need change right now but they do need discussion. 15:53:20 .. I don't think we can make any changes to IMSC 1.2 for them but we can consider 15:53:35 .. and discuss changes for future versions, if needed. 15:53:49 .. It's also worth noting that some of the ARIB-TTML features look like they are coincident 15:54:05 .. with either existing IMSC 1.2 features or TTML2 features. That is why further 15:54:16 .. discussion with ARIB would be very useful, to understand the best path forward for 15:54:18 .. all parties. 15:54:53 Pierre: I think the devil is in the detail and we have to study each issue. I agree with Nigel's summary. 15:55:07 Nigel: Any other comments? 15:55:32 Cyril: To make sure I understand, you say we will defer to the next version but when 15:55:39 .. practically will we start talking about them? 15:55:51 Pierre: I suggest agenda+ these for the next meeting, to start discussing it. 15:55:55 Nigel: That works for me. 15:56:12 Cyril: Fine for me also. I would suggest that at least for the PUA/Gaiji discussion we invite 15:56:12 +1 for agree with Nigel's summary. 15:56:16 .. Vladimir. 15:56:30 Pierre: Yes. At least on that one it is an intersection of many things - what is possible 15:56:41 .. with fonts, what ARIB thinks and what we think! A complex discussion. 15:57:17 SUMMARY: TTWG raised this for discussion today, and would like to discuss the sub-issues in further detail in future meetings. 15:57:26 rrsagent, make minutes v2 15:57:26 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/05/21-tt-minutes.html nigel 15:57:45 Topic: IMSC 1.2 PR 15:57:54 s/PR/PR (continued) 15:59:05 Nigel: We need a version with a PR SOTD. 15:59:23 .. Please could I ask you to prepare one on a separate branch, Pierre, based on the pull 15:59:32 .. request branch where we add an introduction. 15:59:37 Pierre: Yes I will do. 15:59:44 Nigel: Then I will issue the CfC based on that. 16:01:31 Topic: Meeting close 16:01:49 Nigel: Thank you everyone, we're out of time and agenda! See you next week. [adjourns meeting] 16:01:57 rrsagent, make minutes v2 16:01:57 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/05/21-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:26:23 Chair: Nigel, Gary 16:29:43 rrsagent, make minutes v2 16:29:43 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/05/21-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:30:08 sribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 16:30:10 zakim, end meeting 16:30:10 As of this point the attendees have been Atsushi, Cyril, Gary, Pierre, Nigel 16:30:12 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 16:30:12 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/05/21-tt-minutes.html Zakim 16:30:15 I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 16:30:20 Zakim has left #tt 16:30:57 s/sribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics// 16:31:01 scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 16:31:05 rrsagent, make minutes v2 16:31:05 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/05/21-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:58:19 nigel has joined #tt 17:20:25 nigel has joined #tt 17:20:59 nigel has joined #tt 18:37:09 nigel has joined #tt 19:44:44 nigel has joined #tt 23:52:05 atsushi has joined #tt