See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: nigel
Nigel: On the agenda today we
have a very quick status update on the PR transitions,
... a couple of issues raised by the Director during the
transition request assessment,
... and two issues on the TTML Profile Registry.
... Then TPAC2018 and I think that's all for our agenda.
... Any other points to raise or other business?
group: [no other points]
Nigel: As I notified to the
reflector earlier, our PR transition requests were approved
and
... all three specifications were published today.
Congratulations everyone, and thank
... you for your hard work getting us here.
Thierry: The AC survey asks for
endorsement to move to Rec or request modifications
... or raise formal objection.
Glenn: Approve as-is, see
changes, disapprove, and if so, why, and it asks if your
company
... plans to implement etc.
... I already have submitted ours.
Nigel: I think BBC has submitted
our response also.
... I generally encourage all AC Reps to submit a response,
especially if it is a positive one!
Thierry: Probably we should ping
the companies that are involved in accessibility - these
... people would definitely support TTML.
Nigel: Good point
... I will also prompt the AD CG.
Glenn: The M&E IG would be worth prompting.
Cyril: Maybe we could send them an email.
Glenn: I would suggest a private message rather than a group email. There's no rule why not though.
Nigel: I will send an informative
email highlighting to those groups that the PRs have
... been published and explaining the next step is for members
to vote via their AC reps.
... Two issues were raised during the transition assessment,
one on IMSC, the other
... on TTML1 and TTML2 by reference.
github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/465
Nigel: Is everyone in favour of
deferring an update of the WCAG 2.0 reference to 2.1
until
... a later edition or version of IMSC (after the Rec)?
Thierry: If we want to put it in the Rec that could be do-able, if it is not a normative change.
Pierre: It is a normative change.
Glenn: We've treated changes to normative references as normative changes in the past.
Nigel: Just to confirm, IMSC
Appendix D is normative and the reference to WCAG 2.0 is
... normative, so it would be a substantive change.
... Presumably that means we could not do it in Rec even if we
wanted to?
Thierry: Yes, I think it could be trouble - in that case I would rather delay.
Nigel: Any objections to deferring to a later edition or version of IMSC?
group: [no objections]
Nigel: We have consensus
RESOLUTION: Defer adoption of WCAG 2.1 to a future edition or version of IMSC.
github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml1/issues/370
Glenn: Background here would be
useful. The reason we made it a normative reference
... was that at the time we published TTML1 there was no formal
definition of opacity in
... either CSS-land or XSL-land. The only thing we could go
from was the CSS3 color work
... that was under way and was just arriving at Rec in its
first edition
... as we were coming to close on TTML1 (1st edition).
... There was some discussion about whether to make it
informative or normative.
... One of the comments was that there was potential
dependency. Being conservative we
... decided to bump it up to be a normative reference.
... Looking back, that was probably not the best thing to do.
It falls into the category
... of some of the other CSS specs we have used for derivation
purposes.
... Also, earlier, some of the derivations were not in notes;
now they all are in notes.
... That's the history. My conclusion after going through this
cycle with Ralph would be
... that it wouldn't hurt to make it an informative reference
and be aligned with our other
... derivation references.
... XSL is a normative reference because we used a lot of its
terminology and model, so
... we do have normative derivations from XSL.
... I wouldn't mind keeping the reference in the normative
section or moving it to the
... informative section. I would probably give preference to
moving to informative for
... consistency, in the next edition, not now unless someone is
screaming for it now.
... If a commenter says "support but only with these changes"
then that could trigger
... making changes to the spec.
... We can't rule that out.
Nigel: Thanks, that makes
sense.
... In my view the reference is only made from informative
sections so it is an informative
... reference. It is moot whether the bibliography entry is in
the normative or informative
... section. We could move it with no change in status.
Glenn: I agree, for consistency we should move it to the informative references section.
Nigel: If we think this is only an editorial change, could we make this change?
Pierre: For the record, I think we should not touch the document.
Glenn: Unless someone is really calling for it, outside this group, I agree.
Thierry: If we have an AC rep complaining then we could look at this.
Glenn: Yes
Nigel: My question Thierry was really about the possible, not what we should do.
Thierry: If its an editorial change, we could do it, but if its a bigger change then that's different.
Nigel: Okay I think I'm hearing
consensus for making no change immediately, and deferring
... this to a future edition, unless there is a strong call
from the AC review to make a change,
... in which case we will review based on the AC review
comments we receive.
RESOLUTION: Defer this issue to a future edition unless there is a strong call from the AC review to make a change, in which case we may revisit this based on whatever AC review comment applies.
Nigel: I think the only thing
remaining on IMSC 1.1, TTML1 3rd Ed and TTML2 is to merge
... the PR pull requests and begin work preparing the Rec
versions in new pull requests.
Glenn: Please could you approve the pull request?
Nigel: I've just approved ttml2#1007.
Pierre: For IMSC I will merge the pull request and then take it from there.
Nigel: EBU raised two issues on
this earlier today, which I'd like to mention quickly.
... Now is a good time to start thinking about updates to the
document.
... The two issues were 1: #42, Add EBU-TT Profiles, which
simply lists some requested
... changes. They add updated versions of EBU-TT and EBU-TT-D
specifications.
... I'm not sure who will raise the pull request - I might do
it.
... Can I assume there are no objections to adding those?
Cyril: None from me, but what is the xpath?
Nigel: It's the location where
the document conformance data can be found inside the
... document instance.
Cyril: Is that in the registry already?
Nigel: Yes
Cyril: I see it is in the second table.
Nigel: yes
... The other issue is #43 Add informative mention of EBU-TT
Metadata
... This is a request to add an informative appendix in which
related documents can be
... described. In this case the request is to add the EBU-TT
Metadata vocabulary definition
... which is aimed at contribution, exchange and archive of
subtitle and caption documents.
... It's just a request to list it, with no requirement for
anyone to use it.
Cyril: Why? Those specs are already mentioned.
Nigel: There's a bit more
background - the metadata vocabulary was removed from the
... newer spec versions and moved to a separate spec, hence the
request.
Cyril: What is the new document?
Cyril: Instead of having an
appendix, I feel that people will want to add lots of
things,
... that it may not be the right place for, but instead say
that the ebuttm: namespace is
... defined in Tech3390 and reference that from section ยง4.2,
below the table, in a note.
... "Elements defined in the ebuttm: prefix are defined in
Tech3390..."
Nigel: That's a good idea.
... Would you mind adding that suggestion to the issue?
Cyril: Sure
Nigel: If there are no other
thoughts on that issue, just a reminder we need to create
... pull requests for adding TTML2 profiles (issue #39) and
address issue #38 on how to
... handle Content Profiles vs Processor Profiles.
... I still haven't got any answers for how to do that in this
document.
... Formally, Mike Dolan was the most recent Editor for this
document. I don't know if he
... still wants to work on this, but any of us can prepare pull
requests etc.
Cyril: We need to do IMSC 1.1 too.
Nigel: There's already a pull
request open for that, we just need to merge it.
... Planning-wise, if we are able to publish an updated version
of this on the same day as
... the Recs that would be elegant.
Cyril: I'm re-reading that
document and am surprised by some of the text. It says it
... is the MIME type registration but also that it is a
registry that may be updated.
... I will create an issue on the wording there - it needs to
say it _contains_ a registry, not
... that it _is_ a registry.
Nigel: We haven't made much
progress towards a joint meeting with CSS WG and at this
... stage I'm not sure if we need one. I did notice that they
are planning a joint meeting
... with i18n and put out a call for agenda topics - that might
be something we want to
... check out and add things to? Any members who are both CSS
WG and TTWG members
... can see the request and add any relevant issues to it.
Glenn: On 3rd October Elika sent a message to Timed Text
Glenn: She pointed out that CSS
Text 3 and 4 WDs have been published that include
... line-padding and text-group-align.
Nigel: That's great news, I
missed that.
... I updated the agenda on the wiki page linked to from the
agenda for this meeting,
... to reflect our most recent discussion. Any other topics,
please add them to the wiki page.
... We have requests from a number of observers - I will send
an email to them telling
... them they can attend and observe.
Nigel: We've completed our agenda for today, meet again next week.
Glenn: Okay, thanks all for the hard work. It's nice to have a break after the tough flog.
Nigel: Indeed!
Thierry: Thank you and congratulations to all of you.
Nigel: [adjourns meeting]