IRC log of tt on 2025-10-09
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:58:35 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #tt
- 14:58:39 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/10/09-tt-irc
- 14:58:39 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, make logs Public
- 14:58:40 [Zakim]
- Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
- 14:58:41 [nigel]
- scribe: nigel
- 14:58:43 [nigel]
- Present: Nigel
- 14:59:31 [nigel]
- Chair: Nigel, Gary
- 14:59:36 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 14:59:38 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/10/09-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 14:59:48 [nigel]
- Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/317
- 14:59:54 [nigel]
- Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/09/25-tt-minutes.html
- 15:01:47 [cpn]
- cpn has joined #tt
- 15:01:54 [cpn]
- scribe+ cpn
- 15:02:41 [nigel]
- Present+ Astushi, Andreas, Pierre, Chris_Needham, Harold
- 15:02:48 [nigel]
- Topic: This meeting
- 15:02:57 [nigel]
- s/Astushi/Atsushi
- 15:04:16 [atai]
- atai has joined #tt
- 15:05:48 [atai]
- atai has joined #tt
- 15:05:48 [cpn]
- cpn has joined #tt
- 15:05:48 [github-bot]
- github-bot has joined #tt
- 15:05:48 [rhiaro]
- rhiaro has joined #tt
- 15:05:48 [jcraig]
- jcraig has joined #tt
- 15:06:04 [cpn]
- Nigel: (Recaps the agenda) Anything else?
- 15:06:21 [atsushi]
- atsushi has joined #tt
- 15:07:04 [atai]
- atai has joined #tt
- 15:07:04 [cpn]
- cpn has joined #tt
- 15:07:04 [github-bot]
- github-bot has joined #tt
- 15:07:04 [rhiaro]
- rhiaro has joined #tt
- 15:07:04 [jcraig]
- jcraig has joined #tt
- 15:08:58 [nigel]
- Topic: IMSC 1.3
- 15:10:04 [nigel]
- Nigel: I think we need to cover the ja character set changes and issue 524
- 15:10:31 [nigel]
- Subtopic: Improve the ja character set per ARIB feedback w3c/imsc#614
- 15:10:38 [nigel]
- github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/pull/614
- 15:10:42 [nigel]
- Pierre: [shares screen]
- 15:11:17 [nigel]
- .. Liaison from ARIB raises the question at hand.
- 15:11:28 [nigel]
- .. ARIB kindly suggested character set changes for ja, which is great.
- 15:11:46 [nigel]
- .. There's a note about Ideographic Variation Selector.
- 15:11:53 [nigel]
- .. However that is not a defined term.
- 15:12:01 [nigel]
- .. Atsushi and I have been discussing how to interpret it.
- 15:12:18 [nigel]
- .. We need to figure out what that means, so we don't write something different from
- 15:12:22 [nigel]
- .. what they intend.
- 15:12:58 [nigel]
- .. From Atsushi's last comment I think "ideographic variation sequence"?
- 15:14:26 [nigel]
- Atsushi: CJK compatibility ideographs are there for compatibility.
- 15:14:38 [nigel]
- .. There can be mismapping between character set and what Unicode says.
- 15:14:59 [nigel]
- .. For backward compatibility between local character set and unicode some characters
- 15:15:14 [nigel]
- .. have both mappings within [scribe missed].
- 15:15:25 [nigel]
- .. I believe that is not related to variation sequence or anything else.
- 15:15:41 [nigel]
- .. If someone wants to say about the variation selector usually we say
- 15:15:54 [nigel]
- .. "ideographic variation selector" or "ideographic variation sequence"
- 15:16:31 [nigel]
- .. so they should mean the same as each other. They are terms used interchangeably.
- 15:17:08 [nigel]
- .. I believe what the point means is that the ideographic variation sequences shall be used.
- 15:17:27 [nigel]
- Pierre: That's not part of main Unicode, it's part of UCS-37. Does ARIB reference UCS-37?
- 15:17:59 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Variation selector itself is in ISO10646
- 15:18:15 [nigel]
- Pierre: That's a much broader thing though, includes emoji selectors which I think we don't want.
- 15:18:38 [nigel]
- Atsushi: shows [Ideographic variation sequence] in Unicode 17.0.0
- 15:18:46 [nigel]
- Pierre: You have to know how to represent it.
- 15:19:05 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Representation is described in a separate database, not in ISO10646.
- 15:19:21 [nigel]
- Pierre: Before saying you must or should support this I want to know absolutely certainly that
- 15:19:29 [nigel]
- .. is what ARIB has in mind. Can we get a sample?
- 15:19:39 [nigel]
- .. I don't want to suggest a mandatory thing that's wrong or won't be used.
- 15:20:01 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I wonder if I can ask a "side" way from colleagues in NHK.
- 15:20:17 [nigel]
- Pierre: Please ask informally! I'm interested as an Editor in knowing which part of Unicode
- 15:20:23 [nigel]
- .. this "SHALL" exactly means.
- 15:20:38 [nigel]
- .. Just to clarify the terminology that doesn't exactly match the spec.
- 15:20:56 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Is it okay to reply to the liaison email by myself?
- 15:21:11 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes I think that would be good. I'd suggest if you can write informally in response
- 15:21:27 [nigel]
- .. that we noticed this small difference in language and want to make sure that we understand
- 15:21:43 [nigel]
- .. correctly and ask for guidance or even sample data then that would help clear this up for us.
- 15:22:03 [nigel]
- .. I don't want to go around a whole formal liaison/response loop which will take a long time.
- 15:23:07 [nigel]
- Pierre: [drafts the essential request in the GitHub issue]
- 15:23:52 [nigel]
- SUMMARY: @himorin to ask informally for clarification as per the above discussion.
- 15:25:56 [nigel]
- Subtopic: APA WG comment: semantic layers w3c/imsc#524
- 15:26:02 [nigel]
- github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/524
- 15:26:45 [nigel]
- Nigel: We discussed this back in February and wanted more from APA
- 15:26:58 [nigel]
- Atushi: I believe APA has closed on the IMSC 1.3 review
- 15:27:04 [nigel]
- s/Atushi/Atsushi
- 15:28:16 [nigel]
- .. Wasn't there an accessibility review?
- 15:28:31 [nigel]
- Nigel: I don't think I've seen one, or they've closed it but there's an ongoing discussion.
- 15:28:44 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/a11y-tracking/issues/252 a11y tracking issue for IMSC
- 15:29:08 [nigel]
- Atsushi: We need traction from APA on these issues, I'm not sure if there is discussion or not.
- 15:30:45 [nigel]
- .. Maybe I need to make it clear to APA that we're requesting transition to CRS.
- 15:31:18 [nigel]
- Nigel: Would you like to check this offline and get back to us?
- 15:31:29 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Sorry, let me think about it a bit more.
- 15:32:00 [nigel]
- .. We could ask for the first CRS but I don't believe we can close everything as review completed.
- 15:32:10 [nigel]
- Nigel: That's what we need to do, get to a point where we can publish CRS.
- 15:32:23 [nigel]
- Pierre: What's the hold up?
- 15:32:58 [atsushi]
- https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues/116#issuecomment-3298869859
- 15:33:00 [nigel]
- Atsushi: We need to request a review for CRS but we asked for an early WD review.
- 15:33:14 [atsushi]
- > As we see a FPWD Status, we have no objection, but would like to return to the question of what might be said regarding super/subscript before this profile is finalized.
- 15:33:15 [nigel]
- Pierre: We have a review.
- 15:33:57 [nigel]
- Pierre: They closed their horizontal review 3 weeks ago and their only comment is editorial.
- 15:34:30 [nigel]
- Atsushi: There is a different criteria for each stage. Usually we discuss comments on specifications
- 15:35:08 [nigel]
- .. in early phases but [scribe missed]
- 15:35:18 [nigel]
- Nigel: I'm really confused about this, I thought it was clear what we wanted.
- 15:35:58 [nigel]
- Present+ Cyril
- 15:37:09 [nigel]
- Pierre: I think we need to determine today if we need further review.
- 15:37:22 [nigel]
- .. My understanding is we asked for HR and we got HR. Why do we need to do more?
- 15:37:44 [nigel]
- .. Atsushi, this is super urgent, do we need to do more in the Process or are we good to go?
- 15:38:01 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Let me comment on the a11y review request even though it is closed, to state that
- 15:38:15 [nigel]
- .. this request was not an early draft review but a transition to CRS review.
- 15:38:30 [nigel]
- Pierre: Would you mind doing this today so we can get clarity on this?
- 15:38:36 [nigel]
- Atushi: I'm writing it now.
- 15:39:44 [nigel]
- SUMMARY: Discussion concerned process not this issue specifically.
- 15:39:48 [nigel]
- Topic: DAPT
- 15:41:13 [nigel]
- Subtopic: Include registry data from external files w3c/dapt#326
- 15:41:25 [nigel]
- github: https://github.com/w3c/dapt/pull/326
- 15:42:05 [nigel]
- Nigel: I was implementing validation code and noticed that the registry data was only in HTML
- 15:42:15 [nigel]
- .. in the spec, not useful for using programmatically elsewhere.
- 15:45:16 [nigel]
- .. [shows the pull request data]
- 15:45:23 [nigel]
- .. Any issues with this?
- 15:45:29 [nigel]
- .. Different format for example?
- 15:45:46 [nigel]
- Cyril: Thank you for this, it's good to isolate the data from the spec HTML
- 15:46:17 [nigel]
- .. Regarding the format, GitHub renders CSV as a table, and makes it easy to edit.
- 15:46:52 [nigel]
- Nigel: Interesting, I haven't thought about CSV.
- 15:47:04 [nigel]
- Cyril: It's good as it is, but it would be easier to prepare pull requests if you can
- 15:47:16 [nigel]
- .. see the proposed changes formatted nicely in GitHub. It's minor.
- 15:47:25 [nigel]
- .. It's already great to separate the registry from the main spec.
- 15:48:08 [nigel]
- Nigel: In the spirit of agility and iteration we could merge this now and change it in the future
- 15:48:10 [nigel]
- .. if we need to.
- 15:48:14 [nigel]
- Cyril: I like that idea.
- 15:48:51 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thank you, any other points?
- 15:49:30 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I somehow wonder about these functions and whether a single JSON file will be dynamically loaded two times.
- 15:49:45 [nigel]
- .. Also if we want to include the registry table we may want to include the caption within the JSON
- 15:50:03 [nigel]
- .. data. For content using table might it be better to be generic from the JSON file?
- 15:50:21 [nigel]
- .. I'm actually not totally sure about this JSON file being used, but having some caption or title
- 15:50:41 [nigel]
- .. could have a benefit for the users of the JSON file by itself.
- 15:51:27 [nigel]
- Nigel: That is interesting. At the moment the caption text includes links to other places in the
- 15:51:35 [nigel]
- .. specification, and they would not make sense in isolation.
- 15:52:17 [nigel]
- .. I'm not worried about loading the data twice. Even if the browser doesn't cache it, the files
- 15:52:31 [nigel]
- .. are small, and when we publish to TR the scripts are run in advance to produce the final
- 15:52:36 [nigel]
- .. HTML so it's not an issue on /TR.
- 15:53:27 [nigel]
- SUMMARY: Review to continue, early merge okay, further comments or suggestions welcome
- 15:53:48 [nigel]
- Subtopic: Tests don't always set daptm:represents w3c/dapt-tests#41
- 15:53:56 [nigel]
- github: https://github.com/w3c/dapt-tests/issues/41
- 15:54:47 [nigel]
- Nigel: I found a load of valid tests that are not valid because of constraints around daptm:represents
- 15:55:12 [nigel]
- .. and it's also an issue with invalid files where you might get them showing as invalid for the wrong reason.
- 15:55:23 [nigel]
- .. So firstly I wanted to warn everyone, in case you're using these tests,
- 15:55:32 [nigel]
- .. and secondly, I'll propose a fix.
- 15:55:47 [nigel]
- SUMMARY: @nigelmegitt to propose a fix for the affected tests
- 15:56:30 [nigel]
- Topic: TPAC 2025 Planning
- 15:56:46 [nigel]
- Nigel: From last meeting Gary had some actions to do offline, I don't think I've seen that yet.
- 15:58:05 [nigel]
- .. We really need to know if people have timing constraints, especially if not attending in person,
- 15:58:14 [nigel]
- .. for when particular topics get discussed.
- 15:58:25 [nigel]
- .. If you are attending, please add yourself to the wiki page.
- 15:58:43 [nigel]
- .. We'll have to move to offline discussion of planning because the next call on 23 October
- 15:59:14 [nigel]
- .. has no Chair available at the moment. If anyone wants to Chair please let us know.
- 15:59:19 [nigel]
- .. Otherwise we'll cancel.
- 16:00:04 [nigel]
- .. I also propose that we don't hold a meeting the week after TPAC, to allow people to
- 16:00:12 [nigel]
- .. recover and get on with the other things they need to do. Good idea?
- 16:00:15 [nigel]
- Cyril: Yes, agree.
- 16:04:40 [nigel]
- Topic: Meeting close
- 16:05:36 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thanks everyone. Looks like our next meeting might be at TPAC, to be confirmed.
- 16:05:40 [nigel]
- .. [adjourns meeting]
- 16:05:44 [nigel]
- rrsagent. make minutes
- 16:11:15 [nigel]
- s/rrsagent. make minutes//
- 16:11:19 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:11:20 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/10/09-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:11:38 [nigel]
- Chair: Nigel
- 16:11:39 [nigel]
- Regrets: Gary
- 16:14:43 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:14:45 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/10/09-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:15:08 [nigel]
- scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostic
- 16:15:17 [nigel]
- zakim, end meeting
- 16:15:17 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been Nigel, Astushi, Andreas, Pierre, Chris_Needham, Harold, Cyril
- 16:15:19 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
- 16:15:20 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/10/09-tt-minutes.html Zakim
- 16:15:27 [Zakim]
- I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
- 16:15:27 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #tt
- 16:15:41 [nigel]
- rrsagent, excuse us
- 16:15:41 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items