IRC log of tt on 2019-03-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:00:17 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tt
16:00:17 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/03/28-tt-irc
16:00:19 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:00:19 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tt
16:00:21 [trackbot]
Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
16:00:21 [trackbot]
Date: 28 March 2019
16:00:26 [nigel]
Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/28
16:00:33 [nigel]
Log: https://www.w3.org/2019/03/28-tt-irc
16:00:42 [nigel]
Present: Nigel
16:00:45 [nigel]
scribe: nigel
16:00:47 [nigel]
Chair: Nigel
16:00:50 [nigel]
Regrets: Andreas
16:01:57 [nigel]
Present+ Glenn, Gary, Pierre
16:02:26 [nigel]
Present+ Matt
16:02:41 [nigel]
Regrets+ Cyril
16:02:48 [nigel]
Topic: This Meeting
16:03:27 [nigel]
Nigel: Hello! [iterates through agenda]
16:03:58 [nigel]
Glenn: I have a couple of items on the profile registry
16:04:01 [nigel]
Nigel: Ok
16:04:45 [nigel]
Present+ Philippe
16:05:47 [nigel]
Nigel: AOB or particular points to make sure we cover today?
16:05:52 [nigel]
group: [silence]
16:06:01 [nigel]
Topic: TTWG Charter 2019
16:06:16 [pal]
pal has joined #tt
16:07:17 [nigel]
Topic: Add wording permitting TTML3 and a modular approach. charter-timed-text#40
16:07:24 [nigel]
github: https://github.com/w3c/charter-timed-text/pull/40
16:07:55 [nigel]
Nigel: I updated this 2 days ago and @skynavga approved it.
16:08:21 [nigel]
.. Any objections to me merging this now?
16:08:43 [nigel]
group: [no objections]
16:09:03 [nigel]
Nigel: Thanks, I'll merge it now... done.
16:09:12 [nigel]
SUMMARY: Pull Request merged.
16:09:30 [nigel]
Topic: Support live contribution and audio description profiles charter-timed-text#44
16:09:37 [nigel]
github: https://github.com/w3c/charter-timed-text/pull/44
16:10:11 [nigel]
Nigel: Andreas raised a comment that I think I addressed and I addressed my own comments too.
16:10:58 [nigel]
.. Again, I'd like to merge this so the single document is available for review.
16:11:16 [nigel]
Glenn: It'd be nice to merge them all because it's difficult to review the pull requests without a preview mechanism.
16:11:38 [nigel]
Philippe: Sorry I haven't had the time to look into making the preview work yet.
16:11:47 [nigel]
Nigel: Any objections to me merging this?
16:11:52 [nigel]
group: [no objections]
16:12:05 [nigel]
SUMMARY: Pull request merged.
16:12:15 [nigel]
Topic: Other thoughts on the draft charter.
16:12:44 [nigel]
Glenn: There are some references to the SDP-US work which should be taken out of the charter.
16:12:59 [nigel]
.. I presume that the material on TTML2 has been changed to describe 2nd Ed work not the original one.
16:13:02 [plh]
q+
16:13:16 [nigel]
-> https://w3c.github.io/charter-timed-text/ Current draft
16:13:54 [nigel]
Nigel: The wording has become more general there to allow new versions of the TTML specification to be published. Please take a look.
16:14:00 [nigel]
Philippe: Is SDP-US still relevant?
16:14:01 [nigel]
ack p
16:14:15 [nigel]
Glenn: It's still published as a WG Note and there's no reason to change that, but we're not doing any work on it.
16:14:23 [nigel]
Philippe: We should list it in Other Deliverables in that case?
16:14:43 [nigel]
Glenn: You want to include past deliverables.
16:14:47 [pal]
q+
16:14:58 [nigel]
Philippe: It says "may be updated" and doesn't require any work. [wants to keep it]
16:16:30 [nigel]
Glenn: Ok. In the scope, where it talks about new versions it would be useful to talk about new editions.
16:16:34 [nigel]
Nigel: I think that's covered.
16:16:35 [nigel]
ack pal
16:16:48 [nigel]
Pierre: This needs a whole editorial pass through because this has grown organically over the years.
16:16:49 [nigel]
Glenn: +1
16:17:08 [nigel]
Pierre: I'd be happy to do it. It's difficult to contribute to this because it's convoluted due to the amount of work we've done.
16:17:24 [nigel]
.. My goal would be to make a zero point edit, not change small sections. Really rationalise it.
16:17:31 [nigel]
Glenn: yes, it's not organised very well.
16:17:43 [nigel]
Pierre: It needs to say what we will work on, what we will maintain and specific topics to study.
16:17:53 [nigel]
Glenn: It may make it harder to review because it may look like a bunch of changes.
16:18:05 [nigel]
Pierre: My suggestion is to start from scratch.
16:18:20 [nigel]
Glenn: I agree [ that this would be simpler ]
16:18:48 [nigel]
Philippe: I'm supportive of that. Maintenance of Recommendations doesn't need to be said.
16:18:57 [nigel]
.. We still have the deliverables, which can list the documents to be maintained.
16:19:09 [nigel]
Pierre: At the end of the day people want to know our scope and deliverables.
16:19:11 [nigel]
.. And the dates.
16:19:30 [nigel]
Philippe: Yes, so the sections need to stay the same in term of headers, so we have consistency across charters.
16:19:35 [nigel]
.. The scope section could be simplified.
16:20:14 [nigel]
Nigel: It would have been nice to hear that a month ago! I agree with the idea though.
16:20:34 [nigel]
Pierre: I'm offering.
16:20:50 [nigel]
Nigel: It's formally my role to prepare the draft charter and I'm happy to take all input. The WG needs to agree it before
16:20:53 [nigel]
.. it goes forward.
16:21:50 [nigel]
Philippe: Why don't we let Pierre have a stab at it?
16:22:35 [plh]
https://www.w3.org/Style/2016/css-2016.html
16:22:41 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes. If you have a stab at that can you and I have a call in the middle of next week to see where we're up to?
16:22:43 [nigel]
Pierre: Sure.
16:23:01 [nigel]
Philippe: The scope section of the CSS WG is way smaller and that's the principle to follow - define the scope to be large
16:23:11 [nigel]
.. to give the WG as much leeway as possible. The rest is mechanic.
16:23:40 [nigel]
Nigel: In that case we should move to the next topic. All the Pull Requests are now merged so it's a good starting point.
16:24:30 [nigel]
.. I've just assigned Pierre issue #46.
16:24:45 [nigel]
Topic: TTML Profile Registry
16:25:01 [nigel]
Glenn: At this point there are no pull requests and there would have been no issues but Cyril opened an issue, #71,
16:25:16 [nigel]
.. asking to put all the information that we had about the combination operators into the media type definition directly
16:25:31 [nigel]
.. whereas previously we had augmented the introduction which is informative. He thinks it should be normative and in
16:25:45 [nigel]
.. the media type definition. We had expressed a desire to avoid a full IANA expert review.
16:26:04 [nigel]
.. He and Mike are not on the call. I'd like to point out we need to get this Note updated on the main TR website for W3C.
16:26:19 [nigel]
.. It'd be nice if we could do that as soon as possible. I'm willing to wait until Cyril and Mike are online to discuss this
16:26:30 [nigel]
.. issue further. I personally don't think we need to do what he is suggesting here.
16:26:59 [nigel]
Nigel: We could update the note now and consider this for a future change.
16:27:03 [nigel]
Glenn: I would go along with that.
16:27:22 [nigel]
.. The last time it was updated on /TR was in 2017.
16:27:31 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes, https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/NOTE-ttml-profile-registry-20170117/
16:27:40 [nigel]
Glenn: All we need is a resolution and then we can do that.
16:28:47 [nigel]
PROPOSAL: Publish current Editor's Draft of the Profile Registry as a /TR Note and then consider #71 later.
16:28:58 [glenn]
https://github.com/w3c/tt-profile-registry/issues/71
16:29:58 [nigel]
Nigel: Any objections on this call to doing this?
16:30:49 [nigel]
.. If we resolve this now there will be 2 weeks review under our Decision Policy.
16:30:57 [nigel]
group: [no objections]
16:31:07 [nigel]
RESOLUTION: Publish current Editor's Draft of the Profile Registry as a /TR Note and then consider #71 later.
16:31:34 [nigel]
Nigel: There's a publishing moratorium coming up - does that apply here?
16:31:46 [nigel]
Philippe: No, we can use automatic publishing.
16:32:06 [nigel]
Topic: WebVTT Implementation report and CR update
16:32:39 [nigel]
Philippe: On the CR update I didn't see any objections to updating the CR and the 2 week has passed, so can we record a decision to publish an updated CR for WebVTT?
16:32:42 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes we can.
16:33:03 [nigel]
Philippe: Decision: update the CR for WebVTT with the draft proposed by Gary
16:33:38 [nigel]
.. I'll take care of the transition request, and take any questions back to Gary. I will try to do it before the publication moratorium.
16:34:14 [nigel]
Nigel: I added to the agenda a status update on the Netflix questions about Japanese language tests, but Cyril isn't on
16:34:21 [nigel]
.. the call so I suggest we skip that for now.
16:34:40 [nigel]
Gary: The IR is in pretty good shape this week.
16:34:45 [nigel]
.. I've been going through the API parsing test.
16:35:01 [nigel]
.. There were a couple of things without 2 implementations but I was able to update vtt.js so now they pass.
16:35:16 [nigel]
.. For Japanese I didn't get to look at it that much but hopefully will have a better idea for next week.
16:35:47 [nigel]
Topic: TTML2 and TTML3 pull requests
16:36:22 [nigel]
Topic: Add module framework (#29). ttml3#30
16:36:28 [nigel]
github: https://github.com/w3c/ttml3/pull/30
16:36:53 [nigel]
Glenn: I'm waiting for someone to approve a review on this.
16:37:01 [nigel]
.. The last comments I think were from Pierre a week ago.
16:37:10 [nigel]
.. He suggests that we add this support to TTML2 as well.
16:37:21 [nigel]
.. I think it's okay to consider that and would suggest Pierre open an issue on TTML2
16:37:28 [nigel]
.. asking to backport this pull request to TTML2 2nd Ed.
16:37:39 [nigel]
.. That shouldn't prevent this pull request from going forward.
16:37:50 [nigel]
.. I believe I've addressed the other comments, though I can still deal with other issues.
16:38:33 [nigel]
Nigel: There is an unanswered question, which I asked at https://github.com/w3c/ttml3/pull/30#issuecomment-473956814
16:39:33 [nigel]
.. Which is whether to use "private" and "public" for "unregistered" and "registered".
16:39:52 [nigel]
Glenn: I took as my model the Unicode private use area, which doesn't say anything about visibility, just registration.
16:39:55 [pal]
q+
16:40:04 [nigel]
ack pal
16:40:20 [nigel]
Pierre: I still have an outstanding question - I don't understand how processing would be different for private and public.
16:40:23 [nigel]
Glenn: There is none.
16:40:33 [nigel]
Pierre: Then we should not introduce any distinction in the spec.
16:40:51 [nigel]
Glenn: That doesn't follow! We have thousands of statements not testable implementation-wise.
16:41:05 [nigel]
Pierre: Yes and that got us into trouble in the past so I'd rather nip it in the bud now.
16:41:17 [nigel]
.. There is no use for the distinction between public and private.
16:41:35 [nigel]
Glenn: There is if you want to know if a private definition is permitted or not. There's a note that refers to it.
16:41:55 [nigel]
Pierre: I don't understand why technically it matters.
16:42:06 [nigel]
Glenn: Do you recognise the use of a private use area in Unicode?
16:42:11 [nigel]
Pierre: Yes absolutely.
16:42:15 [nigel]
Glenn: That's the model here.
16:42:29 [nigel]
Pierre: This tells people that some codes cannot be used later for public definition.
16:42:35 [nigel]
.. I don't see the parallel here with modules.
16:42:47 [nigel]
Glenn: We define a number of extensibility mechanisms - this is simply another one.
16:43:00 [nigel]
Pierre: It's namespace driven. The allocation of namespaces is done outside this document.
16:43:19 [nigel]
Glenn: One thing we could say with a normative impact is that a private module must not use an officially defined
16:43:22 [nigel]
.. timed text namespace.
16:43:32 [nigel]
Pierre: Sure but that's already defined everywhere anyway.
16:43:50 [nigel]
.. I'm trying to reduce unnecessary complexity. It's additional definitions which are therefore complexity.
16:45:50 [pal]
q+
16:46:35 [nigel]
Glenn: I'm willing to remove the public and private definitions but will leave in the note that refers to private modules
16:46:41 [nigel]
.. and just remove the link to the definition.
16:46:48 [nigel]
ack pal
16:46:57 [nigel]
Pierre: Yes that will satisfy that comment.
16:47:07 [nigel]
.. I think we discussed enabling modules but not specifically defining them.
16:47:47 [nigel]
Nigel: +1 - enabling modules doesn't require spec text necessarily.
16:48:12 [nigel]
.. If you take out private and public then that resolves my question.
16:48:20 [nigel]
Glenn: Can I get an approved review if I do that?
16:48:44 [nigel]
Pierre: I'm really more interested in the hooks we put into TTML2 to allow for external specifications. We'll have to wait for that.
16:48:53 [nigel]
.. But in the meantime you've addressed my question and comment on public/private.
16:49:01 [nigel]
Glenn: We can always add it back in if we need it later.
16:49:40 [nigel]
Nigel: The other question is about a module registry.
16:50:10 [nigel]
Glenn: Yes, and I will be drafting it soon.
16:50:47 [nigel]
Nigel: I question if we really need that - a profile will point to the modules that define features it needs. Why do we need something else?
16:50:58 [nigel]
Glenn: I think it's obvious to list the potential modules that can be used.
16:51:16 [pal]
q+
16:51:18 [nigel]
.. Getting this pull request completed and merged is a gate to defining some modules.
16:51:44 [nigel]
.. We have a record of taking a modular approach - it is not a good use of time to revisit that.
16:51:47 [nigel]
ack pal
16:51:52 [nigel]
Pierre: The real gate is on TTML2.
16:52:10 [nigel]
Glenn: You've noticed I've opened pull requests on TTML2. Completion of TTML2 is a gate for TTML3.
16:53:30 [nigel]
Nigel: I don't think the modular language is the gate to modules here, it's more the hooks for assigning vocabulary
16:54:14 [nigel]
.. to particular processing approaches.
16:54:30 [nigel]
Glenn: [comment about profiles referring to modules by feature definitions]
16:54:35 [nigel]
Nigel: That's a new topic to discuss later.
16:55:24 [nigel]
Nigel: We have one more TTML2 pull request but not enough time to cover it so I propose to defer it.
16:56:06 [nigel]
Glenn: I would like to resolve #1049.
16:56:18 [nigel]
Nigel: I don't think we can do that quickly - there are insufficient tests for it right now.
16:56:34 [nigel]
Glenn: Request a 2 hour session next week.
16:56:55 [nigel]
Topic: September F2F meeting
16:57:06 [nigel]
github: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/30
16:57:59 [nigel]
Nigel: I think there's a growing consensus for a meeting at TPAC and another F2F some time before then in the
16:58:08 [nigel]
.. timescale when we will be working towards a CR transition.
16:58:48 [nigel]
.. Any thoughts about when that would be?
16:59:14 [nigel]
Glenn: We need to start CR by early June for that.
16:59:26 [nigel]
Nigel: Previously that was when you were talking about FPWD, wasn't it?
16:59:35 [nigel]
Glenn: [checks timescales with Philippe's tool]
17:00:26 [nigel]
.. Getting to Rec by end of the year we need FPWD by July 9.
17:00:33 [nigel]
.. For CR then the latest we could do it would be Oct 15.
17:01:01 [nigel]
Nigel: We know our processes take longer than this so we need to back it up more, in real world times.
17:01:16 [nigel]
Glenn: Yes, 1st Oct for CR would be a good target, assuming we don't go to a 2nd CR.
17:01:26 [nigel]
Nigel: I expected an earlier target.
17:01:58 [nigel]
.. Beginning of Sep say means FPWD early June.
17:02:01 [nigel]
Glenn: That's reasonable.
17:02:16 [nigel]
.. That could get us to Rec by mid-Nov best case
17:02:37 [nigel]
Nigel: Then a meeting in July or August would make sense.
17:02:44 [nigel]
.. Terrible from a holidays perspective!
17:03:23 [nigel]
.. I think I should look for dates in July. Anyone think that's a terrible idea right now?
17:03:33 [nigel]
Pierre: Driving meeting times through a document timeline is a good idea.
17:03:46 [nigel]
Glenn: I'm hearing "let's wait until we have a FPWD or close"
17:03:59 [nigel]
Pierre: Although, knowing our options, and starting to plan, with a placeholder might help.
17:04:09 [nigel]
.. But yes I agree that we may not be able to make a decision until then.
17:04:24 [nigel]
Glenn: Fukuoka still looks like a good time for meeting.
17:04:45 [nigel]
Pierre: Yes, and it would be awesome if it hadn't been scheduled at such a bad time relative to other industry events.
17:06:10 [nigel]
SUMMARY: Working assumption is meet at Fukuoka and attempt an earlier f2f meeting in line with spec development.
17:06:13 [nigel]
Topic: Meeting close.
17:06:25 [nigel]
Nigel: Thanks everyone. [adjourns meeting]
17:06:31 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:06:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/03/28-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:17:18 [nigel]
s/to particular processing approaches/to particular processing approaches such as saying ittp:fillLineGap should be processed as a style attribute
17:19:00 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:19:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/03/28-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:20:00 [nigel]
scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
17:20:01 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:20:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/03/28-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:20:30 [nigel]
zakim, who was on the call
17:20:30 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who was on the call', nigel
17:20:36 [nigel]
zakim, who was present
17:20:36 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who was present', nigel
17:20:39 [nigel]
zakim, help
17:20:39 [Zakim]
Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot for more detailed help.
17:20:41 [Zakim]
Some of the commands I know are:
17:20:41 [Zakim]
xxx is yyy - establish yyy as the name of unknown party xxx
17:20:41 [Zakim]
if yyy is 'me' or 'I', your nick is substituted
17:20:41 [Zakim]
xxx may be yyy - establish yyy as possibly the name of unknown party xxx
17:20:41 [Zakim]
I am xxx - establish your nick as the name of unknown party xxx
17:20:42 [Zakim]
xxx holds yyy [, zzz ...] - establish xxx as a group name and yyy, etc. as participants within that group
17:20:42 [Zakim]
xxx also holds yyy - add yyy to the list of participants in group xxx
17:20:42 [Zakim]
who's here? - lists the participants on the phone
17:20:42 [Zakim]
who's muted? - lists the participants who are muted
17:20:42 [Zakim]
mute xxx - mutes party xxx (like pressing 61#)
17:20:43 [Zakim]
unmute xxx - reverses the effect of "mute" and of 61#
17:20:43 [Zakim]
is xxx here? - reports whether a party named like xxx is present
17:20:43 [Zakim]
list conferences - reports the active conferences
17:20:44 [Zakim]
this is xxx - associates this channel with conference xxx
17:20:44 [Zakim]
excuse us - disconnects from the irc channel
17:20:44 [Zakim]
I last learned something new on $Date: 2015/08/27 12:24:56 $
17:20:56 [nigel]
zakim, who's here?
17:20:56 [Zakim]
Present: Nigel, Glenn, Gary, Pierre, Matt, Philippe
17:20:58 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, nigel, github-bot, slightlyoff, mdjp, gkatsev, trackbot
17:21:27 [nigel]
zakim, list participants
17:21:27 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Nigel, Glenn, Gary, Pierre, Matt, Philippe
20:37:48 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tt