IRC log of tt on 2018-11-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:00:03 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tt
15:00:03 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/11/15-tt-irc
15:00:05 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:00:05 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tt
15:00:07 [trackbot]
Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
15:00:07 [trackbot]
Date: 15 November 2018
15:01:02 [nigel]
Present: Nigel, Andreas, Thierry
15:01:04 [nigel]
Chair: Nigel
15:01:06 [nigel]
scribe: nigel
15:01:14 [nigel]
Log: https://www.w3.org/2018/11/15-tt-irc
15:01:17 [nigel]
Regrets: None
15:01:55 [nigel]
Present+ Glenn
15:02:20 [nigel]
Glenn: [can only stay 50 minutes]
15:03:06 [nigel]
Topic: This meeting
15:05:06 [atai2]
atai2 has joined #tt
15:05:51 [nigel]
Nigel: Welcome everyone. For today we have joint f2f meeting with EBU,
15:06:00 [nigel]
.. TTML Profile Registry and TTWG Future Requirements.
15:06:10 [nigel]
.. I'd like to take a quick look at the two new repos as well.
15:06:20 [nigel]
.. Any other points to raise or other business?
15:07:29 [nigel]
Present+ Mike
15:08:06 [mike]
mike has joined #tt
15:08:29 [nigel]
Glenn: I think we should start discussing planning for a possible September meeting,
15:08:38 [nigel]
.. and potential issues and conflicts schedule-wise.
15:08:43 [nigel]
Nigel: Okay.
15:09:00 [nigel]
Glenn: I remember Pierre saying last week that the TPAC 2019 schedule conflicts with
15:09:14 [nigel]
.. IBC so we should decide if we want to meet in Amsterdam or London instead perhaps.
15:09:25 [nigel]
Nigel: Okay let's cover that in f2f meetings agenda topic.
15:09:36 [nigel]
Topic: F2F meetings
15:10:00 [nigel]
Nigel: Status of the joint meeting proposal with EBU on Feb 1st.
15:10:13 [nigel]
s/t./t?
15:10:27 [nigel]
Andreas: Last week we confirmed our plan. EBU Timed Text members and TTWG members
15:10:37 [nigel]
.. will sit together and mainly discuss the further process and activity on the live subtitling
15:10:46 [nigel]
.. use case and how to use EBU-TT Live and what work can be done together.
15:11:08 [nigel]
.. On the day before, 31st Jan we have a TTWG meeting but we also proposed in the
15:11:21 [nigel]
.. EBU group if people may want to join that meeting as well with the idea in mind that
15:11:32 [nigel]
.. possibly some of the work we have done before in EBU could be shifted to the W3C
15:11:43 [nigel]
.. group so work could be done together. Nigel you may want to say more about it, but
15:11:56 [nigel]
.. there is the offer that a few EBU members can join the TTWG meeting as Observers.
15:12:13 [nigel]
.. For the Wednesday the day before we plan an informal dinner.
15:12:19 [nigel]
Nigel: Thank you for that summary.
15:12:23 [nigel]
Present+ Pierre
15:12:37 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes, that fits my understanding, I have made the offer that EBU Timed Text group
15:12:50 [nigel]
.. members can join TTWG's meeting as Observers and asked anyone who wants to do that
15:13:04 [nigel]
.. to let me know in advance, and also highlighted the IPR considerations that apply.
15:13:25 [nigel]
.. The key point I think is those dates are finalised.
15:13:40 [nigel]
.. Thierry, could I ask you please to put together a meeting wiki page?
15:13:45 [nigel]
tmichel: OK, put an action on me
15:14:42 [nigel]
-> https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/3 Action on Thierry to create the meeting page
15:15:10 [nigel]
Nigel: We know the main agenda topic is future requirements and potential Charter revisions.
15:15:18 [nigel]
.. Any other agenda topics to raise now for that f2f meeting?
15:15:55 [nigel]
Thierry: Unless I can invite people from WebVTT, then no, but I doubt that.
15:16:04 [nigel]
Nigel: Okay, let me know if that arises.
15:16:17 [nigel]
Glenn: I think that inviting the VTT folks would be a good idea.
15:16:42 [nigel]
Nigel: I will contact David Singer and let him know this is planned and offer him the opportunity to use the time.
15:17:01 [nigel]
Thierry: Before that I have the action to invite David, Silvia and other to a meeting some time soon.
15:17:25 [nigel]
Nigel: Moving on to the September 2019 TPAC or other F2F meeting.
15:17:56 [nigel]
Glenn: I wanted to open a discussion. I would propose that we have a meeting in
15:18:08 [nigel]
.. Amsterdam if someone can fund the facility or perhaps BBC could host us in London
15:18:20 [nigel]
.. around the same time frame as IBC.
15:18:27 [nigel]
Nigel: I am sure I could host us if that's what we want to do.
15:18:36 [nigel]
Andreas: My question is when we should decide that.
15:18:47 [nigel]
.. I agree also with Nigel's point from last week that it is unfortunate about the timing
15:19:01 [nigel]
.. of TPAC and other events, but I see a great benefit to having TPAC and the opportunity
15:19:18 [nigel]
.. to meet other folks and other WGs and push stuff that if other groups meet together.
15:19:21 [nigel]
github-bot, end topic
15:21:03 [nigel]
Thierry: I need to go to TPAC1
15:21:06 [nigel]
a/1/!
15:21:25 [nigel]
Pierre: In all likelihood I will need to be at IBC for some period of time so then I have to
15:21:44 [nigel]
.. figure out with SMPTE meetings right on top of TPAC. At best it might mean I cannot
15:21:56 [nigel]
.. make it to TPAC until later in the week or not at all. Thursday and Friday I could probably
15:21:57 [nigel]
.. make.
15:22:18 [nigel]
Andreas: When do you need us to make a decision?
15:22:30 [nigel]
Pierre: I agree TPAC is more than TTWG and so I think it would seem silly unless the
15:22:43 [nigel]
.. majority of the group does not plan to go to Japan not to have a TTWG meeting.
15:22:56 [nigel]
.. It might help folks like me if there's a remote conference option, in case some significant
15:23:02 [nigel]
.. decisions need to be made there.
15:23:19 [nigel]
Nigel: Some links for dates:
15:23:28 [nigel]
-> https://show.ibc.org/exhibition IBC Exhibitino 13-17 September 2019
15:23:59 [nigel]
-> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2019 TPAC wiki page - 16-20 September 2019
15:24:16 [nigel]
Nigel: IBC is in Amsterdam, Holland, TPAC in Fukuoka, Japan
15:24:41 [nigel]
Pierre: Right, if it were in the same continent it would be a lot easier but getting to Japan
15:24:47 [nigel]
.. from Europe takes an entire day at the very least.
15:25:09 [nigel]
Nigel: The easiest line in the sand is we should aim to meet 19-20 September.
15:25:22 [nigel]
Pierre: And if possible make remote participation available.
15:26:29 [nigel]
Nigel: It has always been an option in the past, I don't think it will be a problem.
15:26:41 [nigel]
.. I've confirmed the dates for TPAC also at https://www.w3.org/participate/meetings
15:27:03 [nigel]
Nigel: Any other views on this topic?
15:27:14 [nigel]
Topic: TTML Profile Registry
15:27:35 [nigel]
Nigel: I haven't seen any action on the repo this week. Is there anything to report?
15:27:50 [nigel]
Mike: From my perspective, no change since last week: Glenn has some broad things he
15:28:00 [nigel]
.. was planning to work on and I didn't see a good reason to commit anything until then.
15:28:15 [nigel]
Glenn: I've not been able to get to this item I'm afraid. Next week I will try to allocate
15:28:23 [nigel]
.. some time to this so I hope to see some progress soon.
15:28:35 [nigel]
.. Please make noise if I repeat that line for too many more meetings!
15:28:37 [nigel]
Nigel: Will do!
15:29:19 [nigel]
Nigel: One thing that we can all do is review the open pull requests, for example there's
15:29:21 [github-bot]
github-bot has joined #tt
15:29:34 [nigel]
.. one that adds EBU specifications, which should be pretty easy to review if everyone could
15:29:36 [nigel]
.. take a quick look.
15:29:59 [nigel]
-> https://github.com/w3c/tt-profile-registry/pulls/ TTML Profile Registry pull requests
15:30:14 [nigel]
Topic: TTWG Future Requirements
15:30:32 [nigel]
Nigel: The first thing I'd like to cover here, briefly, is that as requested last week
15:30:42 [nigel]
.. we have two new repos, thank you for taking that action Thierry.
15:30:59 [nigel]
https://github.com/w3c/tt-reqs -> TTWG Future requirements repo
15:31:19 [nigel]
-> https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/ TTWG general group actions and planning repo
15:31:40 [nigel]
s|https://github.com/w3c/tt-reqs">https://github.com/w3c/tt-reqs ->|-> https://github.com/w3c/tt-reqs |
15:31:59 [nigel]
Nigel: The requirements repo is where we can raise issues for new requirements,
15:32:11 [nigel]
.. and then triage them and work out which specs they will each impact.
15:32:34 [nigel]
.. To make it easier to track what's happening I've created a Project:
15:32:40 [nigel]
-> https://github.com/w3c/tt-reqs/projects/1 Requirements tracker project
15:33:44 [nigel]
Nigel: I've created 4 columns, for Initial Proposal, Agreed requirement, Deferred Requirement and Rejected requirements.
15:33:56 [nigel]
Pierre: Just a comment on those columns, I'm not sure how it's supposed to work. Those
15:34:12 [nigel]
.. boards are for following progress of an issue. You use milestones and potentially tags
15:34:27 [nigel]
.. to work out the status of each.
15:34:34 [nigel]
Nigel: My view is we can use them how we like!
15:35:08 [nigel]
-> https://github.com/w3c/strategy/projects/2#card-14248237 Strategy Funnel
15:35:16 [nigel]
.. I've taken inspiration from the strategy funnel.
15:35:28 [nigel]
.. If we want to track progress through to completion of issues that could be an additional
15:35:31 [nigel]
.. board, for example.
15:35:50 [nigel]
Pierre: I don't understand - there are already milestones, why are we inventing something else?
15:35:54 [nigel]
Nigel: They're not milestones
15:36:29 [nigel]
Pierre: There's already something for tracking, labels and milestones.
15:36:37 [nigel]
.. If there's no milestone on a requirement then it's unscheduled.
15:36:52 [nigel]
Nigel: I think this is orthogonal to that and still useful.
15:37:08 [nigel]
Pierre: Anyway I just think it's more bureaucracy for little gain.
15:37:26 [nigel]
Nigel: Okay, I've also added labels, for example to indicate if I think a requirement might
15:37:31 [nigel]
.. need a charter revision.
15:37:50 [nigel]
.. What I'd say here is let's treat this as an experiment and see if its useful.
15:38:09 [nigel]
Andreas: I think it is very useful to organise it in these panels but it makes sense to discuss
15:38:22 [nigel]
.. it now when it is first proposed so we start with something we can all agree on.
15:38:31 [nigel]
.. We should agree on the process.
15:38:40 [nigel]
.. First an initial proposal before a WG discussion.
15:38:56 [nigel]
.. Then we discuss it, and do what? Add it to a specific milestone. We should see it as an
15:39:10 [nigel]
.. agility backlog. If it is not rejected (because out of scope) then it is still in the backlog.
15:39:21 [nigel]
.. The easiest thing is to say if it is part of the TTML2 milestone.
15:39:31 [nigel]
.. A deferred requirement means we have discussed it but that it is not good for the next
15:39:42 [nigel]
.. milestone, but then how to make a difference to proposals not yet discussed.
15:39:55 [nigel]
.. Maybe easiest to have a backlog and whenever the next milestone pops up it may be
15:40:09 [nigel]
.. discussed again. Only things definitely out of scope get rejected, and need to be
15:40:15 [nigel]
.. changed and resubmitted to be considered again.
15:41:00 [nigel]
Nigel: Milestones are useful but obviously we have to be careful because an issue can only
15:41:11 [nigel]
.. be in one milestone at a time, whereas I think it can be on multiple boards and have
15:41:13 [nigel]
.. multiple labels.
15:41:38 [nigel]
.. Also it should be clear looking at any one issue what its status is without having to
15:41:42 [nigel]
.. see where it is on the board.
15:42:10 [nigel]
.. The other thing to raise is that we have github pages enabled on this repo and
15:42:17 [nigel]
.. Glenn has created a skeleton TTML2 requirements document.
15:42:23 [nigel]
-> https://w3c.github.io/tt-reqs/ttml2-2e-reqs/index.html TTML2 2nd Ed Requirements
15:42:53 [nigel]
Nigel: Glenn, how do you envisage this working?
15:43:04 [nigel]
Glenn: My view of how to use this new requirements repo for TTML2 2nd Ed is that
15:43:16 [nigel]
.. people file high level issues as an anchor for tracking, and then be prepared to write
15:43:28 [nigel]
.. out a more complete description of it using markdown and put it in the Proposed directory
15:43:40 [nigel]
.. under ttml2-2e-reqs and then as the group does that I will incorporate the content as
15:43:52 [nigel]
.. necessarily edited into the requirements document that I've prepared. That will give us
15:44:08 [nigel]
.. something to publish as a Note and refer to as the requirements source for the next edition.
15:44:17 [nigel]
.. I don't want to create too much process but it would be useful to do something like that.
15:45:23 [nigel]
Nigel: I suggest using Markdown and have asked Philippe if we have a W3 theme to use
15:45:35 [nigel]
.. for generating authentic-looking pages from the markdown. He hasn't come back to me
15:45:37 [nigel]
.. on that yet.
15:45:58 [nigel]
Pierre: Respec.js supports Markdown if someone is not comfortable with HTML. My
15:46:06 [nigel]
.. recommendation is to stick with text, period.
15:46:20 [nigel]
Glenn: I think we need to go through a distillation process to get the proposer to get down
15:46:30 [nigel]
.. their thoughts and I'd like a more complete description than something in an issue.
15:46:42 [nigel]
.. It should be owned by the proposer rather than the requirements document editor.
15:46:51 [nigel]
.. Sorry I have to run now!
15:47:37 [nigel]
Pierre: My comment was not about how people would submit requirements - we should
15:47:48 [nigel]
.. accept anything, even Powerpoint, but the final requirements document should be Respec.
15:47:55 [nigel]
Glenn: I did use Respec for this.
15:48:03 [nigel]
Nigel: It seems like we're in broad agreement here.
15:48:24 [nigel]
Nigel: One thing I would really encourage is that alongside any requirements comes some
15:48:44 [nigel]
.. testable statements, for example in the style of Behaviour Driven Development (BDD).
15:49:03 [nigel]
Nigel: That will allow us to check that any future spec changes meet the desired outcomes.
15:49:17 [nigel]
.. It will also allow us to create implementation tests that are meaningful.
15:49:49 [nigel]
.. Any other thoughts about these requirements?
15:50:03 [nigel]
.. Reminder that we have a deadline of 20th December for documented requirements to
15:50:10 [nigel]
.. discuss in our f2f, so please do submit them!
15:50:55 [nigel]
Topic: Ruby Reserve
15:51:15 [nigel]
Pierre: Someone asked me about how to deal with Ruby Reserve in CSS. Do you recall how
15:51:19 [nigel]
.. we said we would do it?
15:51:36 [nigel]
Nigel: I can't recall off the top of my head.
15:51:47 [nigel]
Pierre: I don't recall it being put in the CSS hopper.
15:53:18 [nigel]
Nigel: Looking at the CSS Ruby spec, the obvious thing to do is to use white space, but
15:53:23 [nigel]
.. I don't know how you'd author that.
15:53:40 [nigel]
Pierre: That's how IMSC.js does it, maybe that's the answer, use zero width whitespace.
15:53:44 [nigel]
Nigel: Maybe, it doesn't seem great.
15:54:02 [nigel]
Pierre: Alright, thanks.
15:54:40 [nigel]
Topic: TTWG Repo
15:54:55 [nigel]
Nigel: Coming back to my earlier point, we have the TTWG repo now, and I've created
15:55:10 [nigel]
.. a project for us in there, with a column for actions and another for future meetings.
15:55:26 [nigel]
.. Again, experimentally, I raised the agenda for today as an issue on that repo.
15:55:30 [nigel]
-> https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/projects/1 TTWG Project board
15:56:04 [nigel]
Nigel: Any initial comments on that, is it useful to have agendas raised as issues?
15:56:10 [nigel]
Pierre: What about adding them as documents?
15:56:40 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes, I could do that, I like the idea of being able to close the issue and have it
15:56:44 [nigel]
.. move out of the way.
15:56:59 [nigel]
Andreas: If it is easier for you Nigel I don't mind, I haven't had an issue that needs to be
15:57:01 [nigel]
.. solved I think.
15:57:59 [nigel]
Nigel: The only issue it fixes is it means I can correct mistakes in agendas after they have been sent out.
15:58:17 [nigel]
Mike: I have to run, thank you everybody. [leaves call]
15:58:30 [nigel]
Nigel: It also provides a hook for people to request agenda topics.
15:58:47 [nigel]
.. The last it allows is future planning of agenda topics more than a week in advance.
15:58:54 [nigel]
s/last it/last thing
15:59:07 [nigel]
s/last thing/last thing it
15:59:18 [nigel]
Nigel: So it could have some advantages.
15:59:28 [nigel]
.. I'll run with both for a while and see how it goes.
15:59:39 [nigel]
Topic: Meeting close
16:00:13 [nigel]
Nigel: Thank you everyone, we've completed our agenda, meet same time next week. [adjourns meeting]
16:00:16 [atai2]
atai2 has left #tt
16:00:17 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:00:17 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/11/15-tt-minutes.html nigel
16:02:21 [nigel]
s|a/1/!||
16:02:26 [nigel]
s/TPAC1/TPAC!
16:02:32 [nigel]
s/github-bot, end topic//
16:02:47 [nigel]
s/Exhibitino/Exhibition
16:17:54 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:17:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/11/15-tt-minutes.html nigel
16:20:01 [nigel]
scribeOptions -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
16:20:03 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:20:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/11/15-tt-minutes.html nigel
16:22:16 [nigel]
s/scribeOptions -final -noEmbedDiagnostics//
16:22:23 [nigel]
scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
16:22:25 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:22:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/11/15-tt-minutes.html nigel
16:25:45 [nigel]
github-bot, end meeting
16:25:45 [github-bot]
nigel, Sorry, I don't understand that command. Try 'help'.
16:25:50 [nigel]
github-bot, help
16:25:50 [github-bot]
nigel, The commands I understand are:
16:25:50 [github-bot]
help - Send this message.
16:25:50 [github-bot]
intro - Send a message describing what I do.
16:25:51 [github-bot]
status - Send a message with current bot status.
16:25:51 [github-bot]
bye - Leave the channel. (You can /invite me back.)
16:25:51 [github-bot]
end topic - End the current topic without starting a new one.
16:25:52 [github-bot]
reboot - Make me leave the server and exit. If properly configured, I will then update myself and return.
16:26:08 [nigel]
github-bot, end topc
16:26:08 [github-bot]
nigel, Sorry, I don't understand that command. Try 'help'.
16:26:11 [nigel]
github-bot, end topic
17:22:23 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tt