IRC log of tt on 2017-05-18
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 13:59:13 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #tt
- 13:59:13 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/05/18-tt-irc
- 13:59:15 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 13:59:15 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #tt
- 13:59:17 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be TTML
- 13:59:17 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot
- 13:59:18 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
- 13:59:18 [trackbot]
- Date: 18 May 2017
- 13:59:31 [nigel]
- Present: Pierre, Dae, Glenn, Nigel
- 13:59:47 [nigel]
- Regrets: Andreas, Mike
- 13:59:50 [nigel]
- Chair: Nigel
- 13:59:52 [nigel]
- scribe: nigel
- 14:02:36 [nigel]
- Topic: This meeting
- 14:03:19 [nigel]
- Regrets+ Thierry
- 14:03:50 [nigel]
- Nigel: For today, we have 2 hours. I don't think there's anything to discuss re TPAC, so
- 14:04:00 [glenn]
- glenn has joined #tt
- 14:04:30 [nigel]
- .. I think we'll be focusing on TTML1 progress, issues, pull requests etc. Do we need time
- 14:04:31 [nigel]
- .. on IMSC?
- 14:04:39 [nigel]
- Pierre: Yes, should be very quick but there's a blocker there.
- 14:05:16 [nigel]
- Nigel: I think the HDR in PNG note has had its time, and I haven't had any responses, so
- 14:05:22 [nigel]
- .. let's discuss publishing that as a Note.
- 14:06:02 [nigel]
- .. Any other business or particular points to raise?
- 14:06:16 [nigel]
- Pierre: Dae didn't you propose resolutions on a bunch of issues?
- 14:06:25 [nigel]
- Dae: Yes but they're waiting for feedback from Richard Ishida.
- 14:06:46 [nigel]
- Nigel: I don't have any other business, but just noting today is Global Accessibility Awareness Day.
- 14:06:50 [nigel]
- Topic: IMSC
- 14:07:03 [nigel]
- Pierre: There's a pull request:
- 14:07:34 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/pull/230 Added explicit spaces in tts:aspectRatio and tts:activeArea definitions (issue #221)
- 14:07:50 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/221 Attribute syntax definition: missing spaces
- 14:08:06 [nigel]
- Pierre: In TTML1 there's prose that has not been imported into IMSC1 about spaces being
- 14:08:27 [nigel]
- .. required between non-terminal tokens. It was never in IMSC1 even though it followed
- 14:08:47 [nigel]
- .. the conventions. So here I propose a pull request that explicitly adds a single space
- 14:09:23 [nigel]
- .. between the tokens in ittp:activeArea and ittp:activeArea. However Glenn is not happy
- 14:09:26 [nigel]
- .. with that.
- 14:09:52 [nigel]
- Glenn: I think many readers would assume that the TTML1 rules already apply even though
- 14:10:11 [nigel]
- .. it is not explicitly stated. By introducing a space there we are going against how
- 14:10:26 [nigel]
- .. attribute syntax is specified in TTML1 and TTML2 since it does not do that except to
- 14:10:41 [nigel]
- .. call it out when those rules do not apply. Also the way it is quoted as a double quoted
- 14:10:53 [nigel]
- .. white space is ambiguous because we cannot tell which character it is. Also it does not
- 14:11:07 [nigel]
- .. work in all contexts even with XML since it is possible to escape white space and it may
- 14:11:19 [nigel]
- .. not be normalised. So the way the comment has been resolved is inconsistent and it is
- 14:11:33 [nigel]
- .. much easier if you simply refer to the TTML1 rule in the convention section or something
- 14:11:35 [nigel]
- .. like that.
- 14:12:28 [nigel]
- Pierre: Nigel, what's your take on that?
- 14:12:50 [nigel]
- Nigel: This is new to me, however for the reason that implementers should not need to
- 14:13:12 [nigel]
- .. create a special attribute parser just for these two attributes, I would agree with Glenn.
- 14:14:34 [nigel]
- Pierre: Okay I'll do that. I'll need to copy the text in otherwise I would have to reference the
- 14:14:46 [nigel]
- .. two places in TTML1 where this is defined, one for parameter attributes and the other for
- 14:15:10 [nigel]
- .. style attributes? Oh actually both are parameters. Thanks, I'll go ahead.
- 14:15:31 [nigel]
- Nigel: There are two other pull requests for IMSC - do we need to discuss those?
- 14:15:39 [nigel]
- Pierre: We can do that offline, no need to discuss today.
- 14:16:02 [nigel]
- Pierre: Also FYI there are two issues Nigel that need your review, and everyone in the Group's,
- 14:16:07 [nigel]
- .. for CR exit criteria.
- 14:16:27 [nigel]
- Glenn: Question: Pierre, how did you resolve that issue about the white space and the
- 14:16:32 [nigel]
- .. fontFamily expression?
- 14:16:43 [nigel]
- Pierre: That's still under discussion, there's no pull request on that. It's on the IMSC test
- 14:16:49 [nigel]
- .. suite not on IMSC1.
- 14:17:04 [nigel]
- Glenn: Your point was based on a presumption about TTML1 that may or may not be true.
- 14:17:27 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/imsc-tests/issues/7 FontFamily009.ttml has a spurious space
- 14:17:50 [nigel]
- Pierre: That has an impact on TTML1 and TTML2.
- 14:18:06 [nigel]
- Glenn: The issue is whether or not space is permitted around terms in a comma separated
- 14:18:19 [nigel]
- .. list, and even more generally whether space is permitted around other delimiters, of which
- 14:18:33 [nigel]
- .. we have a variety. That generic language we were talking about for an implied whitespace
- 14:18:46 [nigel]
- .. between two non-terminals: if you have another kind of delimiter there then that language
- 14:19:02 [nigel]
- .. does not read on the question of if it is permissible to have white space between the delimiter
- 14:19:25 [nigel]
- .. and the term that follows. In this particular issue someone had read it as indicating that
- 14:19:37 [nigel]
- .. white space is not allowed in that context but if you look at the original CSS2 grammar
- 14:19:52 [nigel]
- .. specification from 1998 and this spec you'll find examples where white space appears
- 14:20:06 [nigel]
- .. around terms in a delimiter separated list, and the same in XSL-FO. We did not call this
- 14:20:19 [nigel]
- .. out in TTML but there's a good case for saying that white space is permitted.
- 14:20:47 [nigel]
- .. This will affect all the TTML-based languages.
- 14:21:27 [nigel]
- Pierre: I've arrived at a different implementation from Glenn here.
- 14:21:44 [nigel]
- Nigel: Do we have example data points here? I would expect to see "comma space font name"
- 14:21:53 [nigel]
- .. in real world examples, and I'm sure I've seen that.
- 14:22:04 [nigel]
- Glenn: I think the original DFXP implementations and TTV does permit it.
- 14:23:03 [nigel]
- Pierre: It would be helpful and relevant to see example content here. RGBA values with
- 14:23:10 [nigel]
- .. white spaces are more complex to process.
- 14:24:38 [nigel]
- Glenn: I don't think the spec argues this clearly either way.
- 14:24:51 [nigel]
- Pierre: There are no IMSC tests except for the fontFamily one that demonstrate this.
- 14:25:01 [nigel]
- Glenn: There are some older tests for DFXP that I can go back and look at.
- 14:25:14 [nigel]
- Pierre: At least 2 people in the world read it in a particular way, so it would be a
- 14:25:25 [nigel]
- .. disservice to go back and change TTML1 to make implementations incompatible unless
- 14:25:33 [nigel]
- .. we can show that many documents exist that have that issue.
- 14:27:34 [nigel]
- Nigel: There's an example at http://bbc.github.io/subtitle-guidelines/#tts-fontFamily that shows comma separated lists.
- 14:28:18 [nigel]
- .. I just provide this in the spirit of a single data point. Look at the second row in the
- 14:28:26 [nigel]
- .. document requirements section.
- 14:29:01 [nigel]
- Pierre: We may extend this to fonts but I'm not comfortable extending it across the board.
- 14:29:13 [nigel]
- .. This is about not making existing implementations stop working just by a stroke of the
- 14:29:15 [nigel]
- .. pen on the spec.
- 14:29:25 [pal]
- pal has joined #tt
- 14:29:27 [nigel]
- Nigel: I would go back to my previous point that it should be possible to have a single
- 14:29:44 [nigel]
- .. attribute value tokeniser algorithm rather than being required to use different ones.
- 14:29:56 [nigel]
- Glenn: I don't think we can resolve this but I'd point out that the new conventions that just
- 14:30:22 [nigel]
- .. went into TTML2 explicitly allow for white space around commas and semicolons where
- 14:30:36 [nigel]
- .. they are delimited. That would extend to all argument lists that use commas for example.
- 14:30:48 [nigel]
- Pierre: Unless there's a really compelling reason to do that I'm not sure why we'd need to
- 14:31:01 [nigel]
- .. broaden the scope there and increase the number of test cases. Also we would need to
- 14:31:14 [nigel]
- .. be careful about terminal and non-terminal values, what about time expressions?
- 14:31:29 [nigel]
- Glenn: No, that's explicitly dealt with; white space is prohibited from those time expressions.
- 14:31:42 [nigel]
- Pierre: Not in TTML1. Unless there's a really good reason, regardless of CSS, we should
- 14:31:49 [nigel]
- .. remove flexibility rather than increase it.
- 14:32:03 [nigel]
- Glenn: For implementers that assume that whitespace is permitted, and authors who
- 14:32:18 [nigel]
- .. assume it is permitted then your position might make their assumption invalid.
- 14:32:30 [nigel]
- Pierre: Only for authors. If we are going to make that change, we need to know if authors
- 14:32:36 [nigel]
- .. have been using that capability.
- 14:32:44 [nigel]
- Glenn: So we need more input on this.
- 14:32:49 [nigel]
- Nigel: I agree we cannot resolve it today.
- 14:33:45 [nigel]
- .. Specifically we would want to know if there are implementations that do not work properly
- 14:34:00 [nigel]
- .. in the case that spaces exist, and if there are documents that include additional spaces.
- 14:34:51 [nigel]
- Topic: TTML issue assignment and progress tracking
- 14:35:22 [nigel]
- Nigel: Looking at the milestones, we have 36 open, 47 closed on the Editor's list for WR,
- 14:35:27 [nigel]
- .. which is 56% complete.
- 14:35:39 [nigel]
- .. And we have 5 open 0 closed on the Group's WR action required list.
- 14:36:17 [nigel]
- Glenn: Approximately 22 have been closed in the last week. If I can keep up this rate then
- 14:36:28 [nigel]
- .. we are going to be pretty close to getting to 100% by the end of this month, so that is
- 14:36:30 [nigel]
- .. my hope.
- 14:37:53 [nigel]
- Glenn: I noticed that Glenn has offered to work on #20 and has offered a pull request,
- 14:38:06 [nigel]
- .. thank you for that. I'm working on an update to that pull request today. Can I assign
- 14:38:09 [nigel]
- .. that to you Pierre?
- 14:38:22 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/30 How to specify aspect ratio to understand positioning that may apply for display or video
- 14:39:03 [nigel]
- Glenn: This Pull Request will not be merged instantly.
- 14:39:11 [nigel]
- Pierre: I don't think 3 days would be adequate for this one.
- 14:39:44 [nigel]
- Glenn: [assigns issue to Pierre and Glenn] We're both working on this right now.
- 14:40:20 [nigel]
- Nigel: What's next on everyone's slate for issues to pick up?
- 14:40:30 [nigel]
- Glenn: I'm actively working on a number that I am working on. I cleared a number of the
- 14:40:45 [nigel]
- .. assignments to myself so that others could feel free to work on them. Since then I have
- 14:40:49 [nigel]
- .. picked up a few of them.
- 14:41:19 [nigel]
- .. In one case I submitted a pull request that was assigned to you Nigel.
- 14:41:24 [nigel]
- Nigel: I noticed that!
- 14:41:39 [nigel]
- Glenn: Dae, I have a follow-on request on one of the Ruby examples that I'd like to ask you
- 14:41:49 [nigel]
- .. to fine tune so I will coordinate with you on the side on that.
- 14:42:12 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/203 Add examples of new features commonly used with Japanese content (2 of 2)
- 14:42:25 [nigel]
- Glenn: Also I'd like to point out that there are number of places in the spec where examples
- 14:42:39 [nigel]
- .. are needed, so Dae if you have a chance and some time we would certainly welcome
- 14:42:44 [nigel]
- .. more submissions on those.
- 14:43:00 [nigel]
- Dae: I'll give the document another pass-through and see what I can pick up.
- 14:43:59 [nigel]
- Nigel: There's been activity on #128.
- 14:44:11 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/128 The uniqueness of xml:id needs to be broken for some uses of condition
- 14:44:20 [nigel]
- Glenn: I'll try to add some data points to that today.
- 14:45:07 [nigel]
- Glenn: I'd appreciate it if you could pick up #224 and #156 Nigel.
- 14:45:18 [nigel]
- Nigel: Okay I'll look at those and see if I can take them on.
- 14:45:32 [nigel]
- Glenn: Also #135 clarify timing concepts in relation to SMIL.
- 14:46:47 [nigel]
- Nigel: We did do some of that already, and there's a note on the issue for Pierre to add
- 14:46:55 [nigel]
- .. something about container diagrams.
- 14:47:34 [nigel]
- Glenn: At one point there was an ask to more formally define the times than in SMIL.
- 14:47:46 [nigel]
- Nigel: We did the work already in the wiki, perhaps it just needs to be validated and formatted
- 14:47:48 [nigel]
- .. into a pull request.
- 14:47:54 [nigel]
- Glenn: My worry is it will be difficult to validate.
- 14:48:21 [nigel]
- Nigel: In that case I would propose a WG Note explaining how we interpret SMIL in the context
- 14:48:23 [nigel]
- .. of TTML.
- 14:48:36 [nigel]
- Glenn: I think that's a good idea, and could be added to the spec later. We need to do it in
- 14:48:47 [nigel]
- .. a quasi informative manner that can be validated rather than making it normative spec
- 14:48:54 [nigel]
- .. text that may unknowingly break things.
- 14:49:05 [nigel]
- .. I think all of us have done some implementation work on this and came up with different
- 14:49:14 [nigel]
- .. implementations...
- 14:49:18 [nigel]
- Nigel: That's a worrying sign.
- 14:49:31 [nigel]
- Glenn: The amount of test content in relation to timing is pretty minimal.
- 14:51:07 [nigel]
- Nigel: I have a lot of cases that can be generated from the EBU-TT Live Interoperability Toolkit's
- 14:52:00 [nigel]
- .. BDD tests. That can be done for the TTML2 test suite though they are subject to some
- 14:52:20 [nigel]
- .. starting constraints such as parallel only time container semantics, and dur only permitted
- 14:52:33 [nigel]
- .. on body, but they would generate a large number of test documents and expected
- 14:52:36 [nigel]
- .. processing outcomes.
- 14:52:53 [nigel]
- Glenn: I will also need your help on #96 the extension to add date support to time expressions.
- 14:53:12 [nigel]
- .. I need to read the comments that came in from Nigel and Addison. I'm reticent to putting
- 14:53:19 [nigel]
- .. back in time zone support but I am open to persuasion.
- 14:53:56 [nigel]
- Nigel: Okay. I will review that and see if I can add a further comment.
- 14:55:27 [nigel]
- Nigel: Any further points on issues?
- 14:55:40 [nigel]
- Dae: I will be taking a look, and need to prompt Richard Ishida on some of the open issues.
- 14:57:34 [nigel]
- Dae: How long should we give the commenter to respond, if we're hitting the end of June?
- 14:57:44 [nigel]
- .. Would 7 days be reasonable?
- 14:58:02 [nigel]
- Nigel: From the Process perspective we can take a view on each issue and we only have
- 14:58:22 [nigel]
- .. to dispose of all the wide review comments for transition to CR, so we could reassess
- 14:58:27 [nigel]
- .. the state say in the middle of June.
- 14:58:43 [nigel]
- Pierre: I have a slightly different view - if we take weeks to respond to a comment and then
- 14:58:56 [nigel]
- .. give a short 7 day deadline that might seem funny.
- 15:02:55 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/265 No mention of isolation for directional controls
- 15:03:04 [nigel]
- Nigel: This is assigned to you Pierre, and the last comment is from Richard.
- 15:03:30 [nigel]
- Pierre: This is a new feature of CSS with low levels of support; unless what we have today
- 15:03:39 [nigel]
- .. really does not work my view is to defer the feature to TTML.next.
- 15:03:45 [dae]
- To add to scribe below "Pierre: I have a slightly different view - if we take weeks to respond to a comment and then give a short 7 day deadline that might seem funny"
- 15:04:10 [dae]
- "Dae: This is specifically about issues where the commenter and I are actively going back and forth and one side stops replying"
- 15:05:09 [nigel]
- Glenn: This has already entered the Unicode bidi algorithm.
- 15:05:18 [nigel]
- Pierre: I'm not the best person to comment on this.
- 15:05:32 [nigel]
- Glenn: Also Unicode added explicit control characters with the isolate semantics, not in
- 15:05:45 [nigel]
- .. the bidi spec. The original reason for the bidi properties in CSS were to provide a stylesheet
- 15:05:58 [nigel]
- .. mechanism that would express the same information as was in the explicit bidi control
- 15:06:10 [nigel]
- .. characters that would allow authors to avoid using those characters. Given the current
- 15:06:20 [nigel]
- .. state since it is permitted in the character content that's a case where you could not
- 15:06:35 [nigel]
- .. represent it in style information in TTML right now whereas in CSS you can. I was going
- 15:06:47 [nigel]
- .. to suggest that we accept this change and add the necessary properties.
- 15:06:54 [nigel]
- Pierre: I would not object to that.
- 15:07:04 [nigel]
- Glenn: I do agree it would be work for implementations and testing.
- 15:07:19 [nigel]
- Pierre: imsc.js would support it to the extent that browsers support it, which is spotty.
- 15:07:29 [nigel]
- Glenn: The community will demand it so it will come along.
- 15:07:38 [nigel]
- Pierre: Hopefully we'll have better support when we get to PR.
- 15:07:48 [nigel]
- Glenn: I'm adding a comment to say that I generally support this.
- 15:07:54 [nigel]
- Pierre: I can generate a pull request for it then.
- 15:07:57 [nigel]
- Glenn: Sounds good to me.
- 15:10:53 [nigel]
- Nigel: We need to have at least a placeholder for an example there too.
- 15:11:45 [nigel]
- Topic: TTML1 & TTML2 issues, action, PRs, editorial actions etc
- 15:18:09 [nigel]
- Pierre: People interested in aspect ratios etc should look at the pull request I drafted yesterday:
- 15:18:18 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/pull/321 Initial pass at rationalizing aspect ratio and pixel dimensions
- 15:18:31 [nigel]
- Glenn: As I mentioned before I am in the process of creating a new commit for this branch
- 15:18:38 [nigel]
- .. which will generate some further discussion.
- 15:18:57 [nigel]
- .. This will knock off at least 2 or maybe 3 related issues which I think I've already
- 15:19:03 [nigel]
- .. incorporated into #30 by reference at this point.
- 15:21:41 [nigel]
- Nigel: Regarding mediaOffset Glenn and I had some email discussion.
- 15:21:55 [nigel]
- Glenn: I need to read your message carefully on that so it's pending. We are not
- 15:22:06 [nigel]
- .. synchronised in our understanding at this point. I don't have anything specific that I
- 15:22:09 [nigel]
- .. need input on right now.
- 15:23:50 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/96 Specify date as well as hours, minutes and seconds in time expressions
- 15:24:25 [nigel]
- Nigel: In this case I think we need the option of a timezone because there are two possible
- 15:24:44 [nigel]
- .. valid use cases for clockMode="local", one in which just whatever local timezone applies
- 15:25:32 [nigel]
- .. is used, so the timezone is not specified, and the other is that a specific timezone is
- 15:25:41 [nigel]
- .. intended and needs to be specified.
- 15:25:47 [nigel]
- Pierre: How would you encode the timezone?
- 15:31:04 [nigel]
- Glenn: Using the same syntax as in the source for this, which is SMIL, and the timezone part is based on ISO 8601.
- 15:38:12 [nigel]
- group: Discussion of the merits and ambiguity/clarity of including a timezone component
- 15:38:32 [nigel]
- .. in local times - Nigel argues in favour on the basis of operational utility, understanding
- 15:38:49 [nigel]
- .. that a local time with a timezone offset is a different way to express a UTC time;
- 15:39:03 [nigel]
- .. Glenn and Pierre argue that if a UTC time is intended then a UTC time should be used
- 15:39:11 [nigel]
- .. and that local times always need to be treated locally.
- 15:42:12 [nigel]
- Nigel: In that case if we are going to use local in this way we need to clarify it.
- 15:42:16 [nigel]
- Glenn: That seems reasonable.
- 15:42:21 [nigel]
- Nigel: I've added a comment on the issue.
- 15:43:16 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/125 Add ttm:mediaTimestamp (or equivalent) attribute
- 15:43:21 [nigel]
- Glenn: I need to review your input Nigel.
- 15:44:27 [nigel]
- .. I also need to understand the proposal to use set in #128
- 15:44:34 [nigel]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/128 The uniqueness of xml:id needs to be broken for some uses of condition
- 15:44:47 [nigel]
- Pierre: I also need to consider the impact on implementations there. The bigger question
- 15:45:00 [nigel]
- .. of when condition is evaluated was brought up, which is somewhat orthogonal but
- 15:45:13 [nigel]
- .. something we need to consider at some point. It impacts more than just this issue.
- 15:45:41 [nigel]
- Nigel: I agree - this was one of my earliest questions regarding the condition mechanism.
- 15:46:26 [nigel]
- Glenn: My current position is that it needs to be resolved at presentation time. Also there
- 15:46:36 [nigel]
- .. is a special case that can be made that some of the semantics of a style element should
- 15:46:51 [nigel]
- .. not be ignored even though it is conditionally excluded. Because of chained referential
- 15:47:05 [nigel]
- .. styling you might have two or three styles that refer back to something that gets incorporated.
- 15:47:17 [nigel]
- .. If you conditionally exclude a style in the middle of a chain does that break the chain
- 15:47:33 [nigel]
- .. or just exclude those style attributes defined by that style element?
- 15:47:50 [nigel]
- .. This is a case where partial semantics need to be retained. I've implemented that in TTXV.
- 15:48:49 [nigel]
- Nigel: This points to a problem possibly with the use of the term "ignore" in that it does
- 15:49:01 [nigel]
- .. not mean that the element itself is ignored but that the things it defines are ignored.
- 15:49:49 [nigel]
- Glenn: Yes that is exactly the case.
- 15:50:45 [nigel]
- Nigel: So in terms of action we need to change the term ignore or define it better.
- 15:50:52 [nigel]
- Glenn: I agree that more clarification is needed.
- 15:50:59 [nigel]
- Pierre: It has to be added to the style resolution process.
- 15:51:01 [nigel]
- Glenn: I agree.
- 15:52:28 [nigel]
- .. I have some tests in the TTT test suite that test this. And condition is a feature so it ca
- 15:52:38 [nigel]
- s/ And condition is a feature so it ca/
- 15:52:50 [nigel]
- Topic: HDR in PNG
- 15:53:00 [nigel]
- action-495?
- 15:53:00 [trackbot]
- action-495 -- Thierry Michel to Update the ttwg homepage and publications pages for the new repos -- due 2017-04-20 -- OPEN
- 15:53:00 [trackbot]
- http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/495
- 15:53:50 [nigel]
- Nigel: I see that this is done.
- 15:54:07 [nigel]
- close action-495
- 15:54:07 [trackbot]
- Closed action-495.
- 15:56:49 [nigel]
- PROPOSAL: Publish the PQ HDR in PNG document as a Working Group Note
- 15:57:11 [nigel]
- Nigel: I've just spotted that the ICC file claims that it has copyright with Adobe Systems.
- 15:57:38 [nigel]
- Glenn: Apache licensing doesn't allow use of an ICC file; we had to make other arrangements.
- 15:57:49 [nigel]
- .. It was copyright by Adobe.
- 15:58:00 [nigel]
- Pierre: So Adobe holds a copyright on every ICC file ever made?
- 15:58:12 [nigel]
- Glenn: No, there's a standard one that's widely used in the industry but Apache decided
- 15:58:18 [nigel]
- .. we could not include that in any Apache project.
- 15:58:27 [nigel]
- Pierre: This ICC file is bespoke and was made by hand.
- 15:59:14 [nigel]
- .. Thanks for highlighting this. It was not taken from any existing tool.
- 15:59:26 [nigel]
- Nigel: Presumably we need to update the copyright notice here to say W3C.
- 16:00:06 [nigel]
- Pierre: I will follow up with whoever created it.
- 16:04:12 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #tt
- 16:04:40 [nigel]
- Nigel: I think we can resolve to publish that after making those changes.
- 16:04:53 [nigel]
- Pierre: Okay, if I learn that we cannot change the copyright notice on the ICC I will notify
- 16:04:55 [nigel]
- .. the group.
- 16:05:28 [nigel]
- RESOLUTION: After applying fixes to the outstanding issues, publish the PQ HDR in PNG document as a WG Note.
- 16:06:05 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thanks everyone. [adjourns meeting]
- 16:06:12 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:06:12 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/18-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:14:35 [nigel]
- i|-> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/265|Dae: This is specifically about issues where the commenter and I are actively going back and forth and one side stops replying
- 16:14:41 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:14:41 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/18-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:14:59 [nigel]
- s| To add to scribe below "Pierre: I have a slightly different view - if we take weeks to respond to a comment and then give a short 7 day deadline that might seem funny"|
- 16:15:08 [nigel]
- s|"Dae: This is specifically about issues where the commenter and I are actively going back and forth and one side stops replying"|
- 16:15:29 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:15:29 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/18-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:17:40 [nigel]
- ScribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
- 16:17:42 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:17:42 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/18-tt-minutes.html nigel