16:01:29 RRSAgent has joined #tt 16:01:34 logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/12/19-tt-irc 16:01:34 RRSAgent, make logs Public 16:01:35 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 16:02:01 Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/297 16:02:13 Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/12/05-tt-minutes.html 16:02:19 present: Andreas, Nigel, Pierre 16:02:30 Regrets: Gary, Atsushi 16:02:37 scribe: nigel 16:02:40 Chair: Nigel 16:02:44 rrsagent, make minutes 16:02:46 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:03:54 Present+ Cyril 16:03:58 Topic: This meeting 16:04:58 Nigel: Today we have some DAPT stuff, IMSC 1.3 and Charter. 16:05:08 .. And an end of year AOB. 16:05:21 .. Anyone for anything else, or points to make sure we get to? 16:05:39 Pierre: IMSC and ARIB 16:05:43 Nigel: That's on the agenda 16:06:05 Topic: DAPT 16:06:13 Subtopic: CR publication status 16:06:29 Nigel: I don't believe Atsushi has opened the transition request GitHub issue yet. 16:07:29 .. We have a late substantice PR, and there's a publication moratorium I think next week and the week after 16:07:34 Present+ Atsushi 16:07:38 Regrets- Atsushi 16:08:12 Atsushi: I haven't heard from Security WG and will ping Simone for this shortly. 16:08:34 Nigel: I'm hoping we can get this published really soon in January 16:08:56 Atsushi: I believe so. I plan to file the transition request issue , which is already 1.5 months ago 16:09:07 .. so I believe we can set a deadline of 0.5 or 1 month from now 16:09:35 .. In any case I will ping them - a normal amount of time has already elapsed. 16:10:30 Subtopic: Add an XSD w3c/dapt#273 16:10:41 github: https://github.com/w3c/dapt/pull/273 16:11:12 Cyril: I thought there would be a quick way to run a command line tool to validate 16:11:16 .. a document against an XSD. 16:11:20 .. I didn't find one. 16:11:32 .. Maybe we should document that for people 16:11:41 Nigel: I still feel sure there are command line tools. 16:12:02 .. I found a python library called xmlschema and another Java app that wraps native Java 16:12:08 .. functionality that should do it. 16:13:08 .. It's really easy to write a few lines of python to validate against the schema, 16:13:39 .. so one option is to create a validator and put it in the repo, or in a separate repo. 16:13:56 .. What's most useful here? 16:14:20 Cyril: If I struggle, others would too. Obviously you can write a wrapper around a library, 16:14:28 .. and people might not be confident. 16:14:39 .. I agree, if you have a python wrapper it would help people. 16:14:45 .. Could be in the same repo, I don't know. 16:15:05 Andreas: Usually a command line utility would work. I'm not sure what's wrong with this schema. 16:15:22 Cyril: I tried xmllint and it didn't work. Saxon EE may have it, but Saxon HE doesn't. 16:15:40 Andreas: Saxon EE definitely, it's well known, but it's not a free tool. 16:16:00 .. I can also check. As you say, it's not only an issue for DAPT but all other TTML schemas. 16:16:11 .. Pierre, you are also implementing an online schema validator, right? 16:16:23 Pierre: Yes, just the Java one. It's a wrapper. 16:16:35 .. Very few command line validators work with more than one XSD. 16:16:45 .. If you have dependencies between XSDs it's much harder. 16:17:02 .. Online is best, right, because it's easiest for people to run. 16:17:20 .. But a command line wrapper that includes all the XSDs and loads them properly is probably easiest for the end user. 16:18:07 Nigel: If it's going to help validate the PR I can add a few lines of Python and install instructions 16:18:09 .. into the repo. 16:18:13 Cyril: I support that. 16:18:32 SUMMARY: @nigelmegitt to add a validator script that uses the XSD 16:18:55 Nigel: Any other recommendations for command line validators also very welcome! 16:20:00 Subtopic: Add daptm:descType feature and permit user-defined values w3c/dapt#278 16:20:09 github: https://github.com/w3c/dapt/pull/278 16:20:44 Nigel: This has an approval and has been open for 13 days, so my plan is to merge it tomorrow. 16:21:02 .. I wanted to raise it in a call because it's substantive. 16:21:09 .. And to give the opportunity for comment. 16:21:46 Cyril: It feels like the Registry definition should state if user defined values should be allowed, 16:22:05 .. I mean guidance to registry authors to think about allowing user defined values. 16:22:15 Nigel: We had it in one registry and not in the other. 16:22:20 Cyril: Yes, we just missed it. 16:22:46 Nigel: But this is more than that - we were missing an extension feature for descType, 16:22:50 .. so this adds that. 16:23:04 .. Once it's merged I'll add it to the implementation report. 16:24:16 .. [describes the PR as per the PR description] 16:24:41 .. Does anyone need more time for this? If not I'll merge it tomorrow. 16:24:48 no requests for more time 16:25:01 SUMMARY: @nigelmegitt to merge tomorrow if no new requests for change 16:25:20 Topic: IMSC 1.3 16:26:19 Pierre: I plan to create an initial draft after the break 16:26:28 Nigel: Great. Do you need any new repos? 16:26:32 Pierre: No I don't think so 16:26:45 Nigel: It's just about creating the document then 16:26:51 Pierre: Yes. Sorry for the delay. 16:27:01 .. We're about to run out of time for any ARIB stuff 16:27:12 .. so unless there's something concrete in the next couple of weeks its not going to make it. 16:27:19 .. The window is closing. 16:27:48 Nigel: We had some communication with ARIB. Are we expecting anything from them? 16:28:02 Atsushi: We can send a liaison and continue with private conversations. 16:28:24 .. I suppose it is quite hard for them to make official statements in the timescale. 16:28:38 Pierre: They've had 4 years! It's fine though, if they're not interested. 16:29:25 Atsushi: I will contact them directly in person. 16:30:14 .. They need to get stamps from bottom to top for any official response, even if it's the same answer 16:30:20 .. that they give unofficially. 16:30:43 .. The easiest way is to ask them just in person about any updates and 16:31:00 .. after we update our spec and we ask them via an official liaison if it is fine for them then they 16:31:03 .. will say yes. 16:31:26 pal has joined #tt 16:31:59 Pierre: I do have a philosophical question: 16:32:22 .. So far we have done IMSC incrementally, incrementing version numbers. 16:32:32 .. Every time we have added and deprecated features. 16:32:39 .. The next version will presumably be 1.3. 16:32:48 .. Do we really want that or adopt a different scheme. 16:33:06 .. In 1.2 there was one feature in particular added, downloadable fonts. 16:33:13 .. I've not seen that used in practice. 16:33:16 .. Has it been used? 16:33:29 .. If not, should we consider deprecating it or is there a different mechanism 16:33:39 .. by which we can communicate to the world that it is not really used. 16:33:47 q+ 16:34:09 .. 1.2 also did other things like improving the document structure. 16:34:16 ack n 16:34:38 Nigel: The need for a specific font is definitely something that the BBC has. 16:34:51 .. The mechanism for this depends on the delivery route. 16:35:16 .. In the UK there's an IP TV platform called Freely that uses a DASH implementation, and 16:35:36 .. BBC signals subtitles in DASH manifests for that, and uses a DVB DASH feature external 16:35:56 .. to the TTML document, which tells the player to load a font and associates it with a fontFamily name. 16:36:19 .. So our subtitles come out in our font. 16:36:35 Pierre: The IMF (Interoperable Master Format) also does this. 16:36:43 Andreas: And DVB TTML has a mechanism too. 16:37:01 Pierre: Of all the features that's not one that's been requested. 16:37:18 Nigel: My philosophical reason for being a bit keen at least to keep it is: 16:37:39 .. what if an IMSC document is referenced directly in a web page, that might have some kind of 16:38:12 .. polyfill or whatever for playing IMSC documents? Without the feature, there's no other 16:38:22 .. way to signal the need for a font. 16:38:38 Pierre: I don't disagree, but we're far from having native playback of TTML in pages. 16:38:53 .. The question on my mind is do we want to carry around something that's aspirational, or not? 16:39:07 .. There are pluses and minuses. The minus is that it's not great to have an unimplemented feature. 16:39:27 atai has joined #tt 16:39:36 .. It's a way to have bugs that we don't know, and a source for spec errors. 16:39:50 .. There are tons of things in HTML and CSS that are in the spec and partially implemented. 16:39:56 .. So we could go down that path. 16:40:05 Andreas: I'm hesitant on that feature because it's not an exotic one. 16:40:16 .. The use case seems to be not very far away from what could be needed in operation. 16:40:36 .. If it's really an issue to carry this feature around we should ask the community, rather than 16:40:40 .. jumpting to deprecation. 16:41:51 Nigel: We should think about path to deprecation, and the community. 16:42:04 .. The cost of retaining a feature already in a Rec is minimal. 16:42:27 Pierre: The cost could be in user surprise though, if document authors use it and find it doesn't work. 16:42:35 .. It's only one feature among so many. 16:42:50 .. It sounds like for the first draft at least it will stay in, and we can think about it. 16:42:58 Nigel: It's absolutely worth raising. 16:43:08 Pierre: The challenge more widely is around interop. 16:43:28 .. Thanks for that, I appreciate the input. 16:43:44 .. I will create a set of PRs, one for every issue, and send them for review. 16:44:10 Nigel: What will you raise them against? 16:44:27 Pierre: The head of the repo is 1.2, as soon as we merge one then it will become a 1.3 ED. 16:45:07 Nigel: In terms of timing, January should be fine. 16:45:17 .. Otherwise getting it in the new Charter could be awkward 16:45:29 Pierre: It should be possible to merge at least one so we have a draft to point to. 16:45:52 Topic: Charter 2025 16:46:09 Nigel: My draft charter PR has had approvals from everyone who needs to. 16:46:28 .. Atsushi, do you want me to merge it? 16:46:43 Atsushi: You can merge it. 16:47:04 .. From now I need to issue advance notice to AC and update it in line with the Charter Template 16:47:12 .. and request Horizontal Review which takes maybe 1 month. 16:47:28 .. After that I don't think we will receive any comments but we may update minor things. 16:47:40 .. Then I will request a 1 month AC review period. 16:48:21 .. I will raise another pull request for the charter template changes. 16:48:46 .. Also if anyone in the WG or anyone from participating organisations in TTWG has any comments 16:48:56 .. on the current Charter please provide them as soon as possible. 16:49:12 .. Before bringing it to AC! 16:51:26 check at htmlpreview -> https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/charter-timed-text/refs/heads/issue-0088/charter2025/index.html 16:51:32 Topic: AOB - Thanks for all your work in 2024! 16:51:59 Nigel: Thanks for all your hard work this year everyone, a small number of us doing a lot. 16:52:11 .. Have a good break if you're getting one. 16:52:19 Pierre: Warmest wishes for the holidays and the new year 16:52:28 Andreas: All the best from me for the new year - have a nice time 16:52:34 Cyril: Likewise! 16:53:02 Nigel: The next call will be 16th January. I cancelled the 2nd Jan one due to availability. 16:53:56 .. Let's adjourn for today and for 2024. See you next year! [adjourns meeting] 16:54:00 rrsagent, make minutes 16:54:02 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:55:02 s/substantice/substantive 16:59:57 rrsagent, make minutes 16:59:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/12/19-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:00:22 scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 17:00:26 zakim, end meeting 17:00:26 As of this point the attendees have been Andreas, Nigel, Pierre, Cyril, Atsushi 17:00:28 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 17:00:30 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/12/19-tt-minutes.html Zakim 17:00:36 I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 17:00:37 Zakim has left #tt 17:00:44 rrsagent, excuse us 17:00:44 I see no action items