15:00:24 RRSAgent has joined #tt 15:00:28 logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/03/27-tt-irc 15:00:28 RRSAgent, make logs Public 15:00:29 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 15:01:07 scribe: nigel 15:01:14 Present: Matt, Nigel 15:01:26 Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/303 15:01:35 Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/03/13-tt-minutes.html 15:01:53 Chair: Nigel, Gary 15:01:56 Present+ Pierre, Gary 15:02:13 Regrets: Atsushi, Andreas 15:02:28 rrsagent, make minutes 15:02:29 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/27-tt-minutes.html nigel 15:02:59 Topic: This meeting 15:03:27 Nigel: Today's agenda: DAPT, IMSC 1.3 15:03:37 .. Is there anything else to add, or points to make sure we cover? 15:04:25 .. I'd like to cover the Image Profile removal from IMSC 1.3 that we discussed. 15:04:29 nothing more 15:04:49 Topic: DAPT 15:04:59 Subtopic: CRD auto-publication 15:05:15 Nigel: A how-we-work thing 15:05:36 .. In WD phase, whenever we merged a PR to main, we auto-published a new WD 15:05:59 .. Now we're in CR, that's been fixed up so we publish a new CRD whenever we merge a PR to main. 15:06:11 .. Just checking in really that everyone's happy with that. 15:07:12 .. e.g. we published a CRS (snapshot) on 11th March, then I merged the PR that introduced 15:08:51 .. the XSD on 21st March we auto-published a CRD (draft). 15:09:06 Present+ Cyril 15:09:21 Cyril: No problem pushing changes - does it impact the earliest CR exit date? 15:09:28 Nigel: No it doesn't. 15:10:20 .. However it's a good question, will check offline. Could be that we can 15:10:37 .. only request CR exit from a CRS, and if a CRS requires a new exit date then it might have that impact. 15:10:50 Cyril: We shouldn't change the process we have, to publish as soon as we make changes. 15:10:52 Nigel: +1 15:11:08 .. I hear no objections, let us continue with the current working mode. 15:11:32 Subtopic: Test suite 15:11:41 Nigel: We need to populate the test suite. 15:11:58 .. Too much process/good idea to raise an issue on the test repo 15:12:17 .. for each feature we need to add a test for, so we can track progress in completing the test suite? 15:12:29 .. (actually multiple tests per feature probably) 15:14:34 Cyril: I have no problem with that 15:14:39 Nigel: I'll go ahead and do that 15:15:07 .. on the dapt-tests repo 15:18:18 .. On the tests front again, I think almost all the tests will be validation ones because 15:18:30 .. the playback or presentation features are all in TTML2. 15:18:44 .. So I think we will end up having a valid input and an invalid input for each feature 15:18:57 .. and try to make the stimuli as narrow as possible to test that one feature. Sound about right? 15:19:01 Cyril: Yes 15:19:33 Nigel: Any more on DAPT? 15:19:34 nothing more 15:19:36 Topic: IMSC 1.3 15:20:05 Nigel: Nothing showing on the agenda 15:20:24 Pierre: We should look at #44 and work out when we are starting the clock on dropping Image profile 15:21:04 Subtopic: forcedDisplay and visibility="hidden" w3c/imsc#484 15:21:09 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/484 15:21:18 Pierre: There's a lot of reading there, going back half a decade. 15:21:23 .. My summary: 15:21:31 .. Two issues, one that we fixed recently with revising prose. 15:21:46 .. Another which is a much deeper issue about the relationship between visibility and 15:22:00 .. screen readers - either we will do something, or close it or defer it. 15:22:03 .. It's a much bigger issue. 15:22:35 .. We addressed part of it in #593 to change the prose for forcedDisplay to be clearer about its 15:22:41 .. relationship with tts:visibility. 15:22:57 .. But you raised a much deeper issue about the relationship between tts:visibility and screen readers. 15:24:22 .. Ultimately, is there an urgent problem to solve for IMSC 1.3? 15:24:59 Nigel: The use case hasn't gone away 15:25:12 Pierre: That's why I'm not suggesting we close it, but defer it until we are ready 15:27:47 Nigel: The use case is to provide a text alternative to text burned into the video image but absent from the soundtrack. 15:28:02 Pierre: Forced Display is a good example - instead of using it, people just create two tracks. 15:28:12 .. Conceivably what you're providing could be just another track. 15:28:26 Gary: Apple has that concept in HLS, where you can specify a track as being forced or not, 15:28:48 cpn has joined #tt 15:28:57 present+ Chris_Needham 15:29:07 .. and in the guidelines I believe they say that the caption content should include the forced text. 15:29:16 present+ Chris_Needham 15:29:42 Pierre: The reason people split forced vs non-forced tracks is that you get more editorial freedom 15:29:59 .. to change the non-forced text - it could be similar here. 15:30:17 .. It might simply be that this is not the right time to solve the bigger issue. 15:30:30 .. But just having a separate track and signalling it could be enough. 15:30:37 scribe+ cpn 15:31:38 Nigel: It's interesting because you could argue that something like DAPT could be a good alternative. The styling is unimportant, as the intent is never to display it 15:32:39 ... Then the question is if there's ever a point in displaying the text. If not, we can close this IMSC issue. They can provide a different text track and use that instead 15:33:21 Pierre: Write that down, disseminate it, and see what the response is. HLS has a force narrative track type. We just discussed an option to introduce a new track type 15:33:54 Gary: There's an HTML issue for a new 'kind', also discussion of whether it should be a separate attribute, as forced is separate to the kind. 15:34:26 -> https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4472 html issue on kind=forced 15:34:31 Nigel: The goal of this is to have tracks that are only rendered via assistive technology. They could be rendered by script in the page, via Web Speech, or an aria live region 15:34:58 Pierre: The difference between what you're proposing and forced, is you don't want it to be displayed as it's already in the content - for specific languages 15:35:39 ... So your point is you don't want it to be displayed on the screen in English because it's already on the screen. But someone with a screen reader can't see the display 15:35:41 Nigel: Yes 15:36:19 Pierre: That's exactly what forced narrative is. It works when the player-selected language is different from the ** language. What's different in what you're proposing? 15:36:58 Nigel: The language in the media is not the same as the language you selected. We'd want to expose the text alternative, still in the same language, but make available to assistive tech. 15:37:17 Pierre: Could be a player issue, a player connected to a screenreader could always play the forced narrative track 15:37:38 ... The player logic is: if narrative track is English, and the user preference is English, don't display it 15:37:50 ... Because you can already read the text on the screen 15:38:09 ... The same player could decide to send the forced display to a screen reader 15:38:18 Nigel: Web players don't know if assistive tech is involved 15:38:42 ... It's a platform decision not to expose use of assistive tech 15:39:15 Gary: The player can make it available to screenreaders if the audio language is different 15:39:19 Pierre: Exactly 15:39:38 Gary: The only downside is native video elements don't make text tracks available to screenreaders 15:39:48 Pierre: That's a perennial issue... 15:39:59 ... So may not need additional signaling in the content as it's a player issue 15:40:23 Nigel: The player needs to know if it's the kind of text track that should never be displayed on a visual display, or should be in a forced narrative scenario 15:40:58 Pierre: I think the forced narrative track solves your problem. It's just different in the case of a screen reader vs a display 15:41:15 Nigel: I'm thinking through the different permutations 15:41:37 Pierre: Forced narrative is trying to solve the problem where someone can't read what's on the screen because it's in a different language 15:41:47 ... The track describes it in the language of the viewer 15:43:06 Nigel: I don't think that's what forced narrative is. It's for when the content is mostly Enlgish, then there's something in French, then there's no English translation burned in. It's forced but not part of the video image 15:43:23 Cyril: [describes Netflix's definition of forced narrative] 15:43:34 Nigel: That's good 15:43:55 cyril has joined #tt 15:43:57 https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/217558918-Understanding-Forced-Narrative-Subtitles 15:44:00 Pierre: So someone with a screenreader will want to receive the translation if it's not their language 15:44:14 Nigel: Yes 15:45:01 Nigel: The behaviour now is that it gets rendered over the video. The behaviour i'm talking about is it's made available to assistive tech but not rendered over the video 15:45:27 Gary: Question is if you'd have something in the screen reader text that's not in the forced narrative? 15:46:42 Nigel: A video with just burned in text, so you dont' put it into any text track at the moment, but could provide text track for assistive tech 15:47:29 Gary: Why not always make the FN track always available to assistive tech, regardless of whether it's visible or not 15:47:42 ... It doesn't need to be visible if the language of the FN and the language of the player match 15:47:58 Pierre: Exactly 15:48:26 Gary: That's not true ... if the FN has translations, e.g., a sign in French, you'd want it to show with English text 15:48:59 Pierre: The track should semantically describe what's in it, and let the player decide 15:49:29 ... Need to understand the difference semantically between Cyril's definition and what would be this screenreader track 15:49:51 Nigel: In DAPT we have 'represents' which is there to describe the semantic of the content 15:50:22 ... You can describe in-video text, then a player can make it available to a screen reader as an equivalent 15:50:36 ... So maybe we've solved this from the DAPT perspective 15:50:53 Gary: The HTML spec description is to treat it like the metadata type, where you have to handle it yourself 15:51:10 ... Could be an extension for descriptions, where the descriptions track is always made available to screenreaders 15:51:59 Nigel: This brings us back to representing this at the track level, external to the document. I dont' have other suggestions for signalling that's needed 15:54:13 SUMMARY: If a scheme external to the timed text document contents can be used by players to decide what to expose to assistive tech, consider closing this issue with no action in IMSC, looking at forced narrative as an example. 15:54:54 Subtopic: Image Profile deprecation? 15:55:37 Nigel: Pierre and I drafted an outgoing liaison message to say we're thinking about dropping the image profile in IMSC 1.3 15:55:45 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/600 15:55:58 Nigel: Are we happy with the proposed text? 15:56:48 Pierre: Let's plan to review 15:57:11 ... I was waiting for you to say you're done 15:57:30 Nigel: I'll double check and come back to you. Could follow up tomorrow 15:58:18 SUMMARY: @nigelmegitt to make sure the action to draft text is complete and then to send it. 15:58:39 Topic: AOB 15:58:45 Topic: Meeting Close 15:59:16 Nigel: Next meeting April 10. I'm on vacation, so regrets from me. Should we go ahead regardless? 16:00:40 .. Thanks everyone, let's adjourn. [adjourns call] 16:00:44 rrsagent, make minutes 16:00:45 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/27-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:10:27 s/dont'/don't 16:10:53 s/Topic: AOB// 16:10:55 rrsagent, make minutes 16:10:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/27-tt-minutes.html nigel 16:13:38 scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostic 16:13:48 zakim, end meeting 16:13:48 As of this point the attendees have been Matt, Nigel, Pierre, Gary, Cyril, Chris_Needham 16:13:50 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 16:13:52 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/27-tt-minutes.html Zakim 16:13:58 I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 16:13:59 Zakim has left #tt 16:55:27 rrsagent, excuse us 16:55:27 I see no action items