15:59:14 RRSAgent has joined #tt 15:59:14 logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/01/09-tt-irc 15:59:16 nigel has changed the topic to: TTWG Teleconference. Agenda for 2020-01-09 1600 meeting: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/88 16:00:41 zakim, start meeting 16:00:41 RRSAgent, make logs Public 16:00:42 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 16:01:11 Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2019/12/19-tt-minutes.html 16:01:21 Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/88 16:03:29 Present: Atsushi, Gary, Glenn, Huaqi, Pierre, Nigel 16:03:32 Chair: Nigel, Gary 16:03:46 Present+ Andreas 16:03:52 scribe: nigel 16:04:06 Topic: This meeting 16:04:19 Nigel: Welcome to Huaqi Shan and Lin Li from China Mobile 16:04:31 .. And welcome back everyone after our 2 week break. 16:04:59 atai2 has joined #tt 16:05:48 .. [iterates through agenda] 16:06:02 .. Any other business, or points to make sure we cover? 16:06:31 group: [no other business] 16:06:49 Topic: IMSC 1.2 FPWD Next steps 16:07:05 Nigel: Re my action #87 to request WR. 16:07:27 .. This was delayed before Christmas and I managed to get a single key part of it done earlier today. 16:07:41 .. Which was to request wide review on the public announce list. 16:07:51 .. I also have to send liaisons to our liaisons as per the Charter. 16:08:17 .. I plan to adapt the earlier message for the liaisons. 16:08:51 Pierre: One question to discuss: the timetable. 16:09:06 .. What's the best timetable we can achieve for CR of IMSC 1.2? 16:09:51 Atsushi: I am getting back to the timetable, more time please. 16:10:03 Pierre: It's going to be important for me to schedule my time and understand when we're expected to address comments. 16:10:09 .. It would be good to have a tentative schedule available. 16:10:12 Atsushi: Yes 16:11:24 Nigel: Given notice for review, time to address any comments and issues, we're looking at not earlier than 20th or 16:11:32 .. more likely 27th February for CR publication. 16:11:47 .. That's based on minimum 4 weeks review time from sending out the announcements today or tomorrow. 16:12:00 .. Then taking into account our PR merge time, decision review policy time etc. 16:12:07 Pierre: Alright that's good, I'll make a note. 16:12:35 Nigel: The liaison work is ongoing, I'll go ahead and get that done. 16:12:53 Topic: Potential semantic conflict between ttp:profile and ttp:contentProfiles. w3c/imsc#506 16:12:57 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/506 16:13:26 Nigel: Where we left this last time was Glenn was going to have a think about this some more. 16:13:32 Glenn: I'm afraid I haven't been able to do that. 16:16:00 Topic: font selection rules under-specified? w3c/imsc#516 16:16:10 github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/516 16:16:14 Glenn: I responded on this. 16:16:44 Glenn: We should deal with this in TTML in the fullness of time to map more to CSS font-face. 16:16:51 .. I think there's an issue for it. 16:17:08 Nigel: That makes sense, so in the meantime we could consider doing this in IMSC. 16:17:13 Glenn: It was going to be a tough nut to crack. 16:17:31 s/on this./on this. Auto means it's implementation dependent. 16:17:45 Glenn: It depends where the core work on TTML is going to be done. 16:17:53 Nigel: Of course we could do it in IMSC and then move it across to TTML 16:17:59 Glenn: It's clearly a core semantic issue. 16:18:24 Nigel: In that case we should think if we can cover it in TTML2 soon enough. 16:18:33 Glenn: I'll try to find the existing issue. 16:18:44 Nigel: Strictly this issue is off agenda. 16:18:58 SUMMARY: Conversation ongoing 16:19:02 github-bot, end topic 16:19:29 Topic: IMSC 1.1 Errata 16:19:55 Nigel: I double checked the errata document and it does not seem to pull through the GitHub issues in the way I 16:19:58 .. was expecting. 16:20:37 Atsushi: I need to dig out the history of this. The code depends on external resources hosted at github.io that was 16:20:58 .. updated to remove depencies on jquery etc so I need to trace back to when the code was taken and will look into that. 16:21:24 Nigel: OK sounds like my assessment is right that the document is not looking correct now? 16:21:37 Atsushi: Part of the information taken from GitHub is right, but some parts are not working. 16:21:59 Nigel: OK I will leave this with you. 16:22:31 Atsushi: At some point that file was copied from the main repository, but only the main HTML file, so if there is any 16:22:49 .. record of when such a copy was done, I may find it easier to get a pointer to the copy in the main repository. 16:23:11 Nigel: I will look offline - Philippe did it very recently, maybe December. 16:23:19 Atsushi: OK that helps me already. 16:23:28 .. Let me take some time for that. 16:23:31 Nigel: OK, thank you 16:24:01 Topic: AOB - Early merge of TTML2 PRs 16:24:19 Nigel: Glenn is requesting early merge of w3c/ttml2#1191 and w3c/ttml2#1192. 16:24:37 .. These are for the CR publication? 16:25:01 Glenn: Correct. One of them was to update the CSS informative bibliographic references. Writing Mode went to Rec, 16:25:13 .. and a number of others have been updated, some to CR or PR and a few others too. 16:25:30 .. Also the CSS Box is no longer viable for referring to the definition of width and height. 16:25:46 .. CSS Basic Box was superseded by CSS Box so we had to go back to the original CSS 2.1 references. 16:25:57 .. Those are all informative or non-substantive editorial changes. 16:26:15 .. The second PR is to update entities to bring in the CR status of the document and so forth. 16:26:43 .. I want to mention I chose Jan 28 which is the date Philippe gave us based on the wide review or horizontal review 16:27:03 .. process rule according to our Charter. The other one was the no-earlier-date for PR, based on the tool for coming 16:27:09 .. up with dates for the various milestones. 16:28:05 Nigel: There's plenty of time to wait the normal period before merging and still publish on time. Any reason for 16:28:12 .. merging early, particularly. 16:28:20 Glenn: I just want to get it off my list - I have my reasons. 16:28:41 Nigel: Anyone need more time or have any objection to merging this early? 16:29:06 group: [silence] 16:29:17 Nigel: Everyone seems happy so you can go ahead. 16:29:35 Glenn: That allows me to bundle up the TR and send it to Atsushi ahead of publication. 16:29:45 .. I've run it through pubrules and linkchecker and it passes them so it should be ready to go. 16:30:31 .. I'll put the tar together for you Atsushi. 16:31:08 Nigel: This seems a little ahead of time. For publishing on 28th we will need a resolution. The timing means we need 16:31:14 .. to do that today, I realise. 16:32:25 Glenn: Procedural question - can you take that before the time has expired for the wide review, or do you need the 16:32:37 .. resolution to be conditional in order to give time for the wide review to expire 16:32:42 s/ire/ire? 16:33:41 Nigel: Are there any issues? 16:33:53 Glenn: One issue was filed by Jeffrey Yasskin that has not been labelled. 16:34:14 Nigel: That's a HR issue that was raised, so we need to think about our actions. 16:34:29 Glenn: That's right. Options are: 1. Raise for 3rd Ed on the basis that it is not related to any change in 2nd Ed. 16:34:34 .. 2. Address it here anyway. 16:34:47 .. I prefer to do the former and label as 3rd Ed and not make any further changes on 2nd Ed. 16:34:54 Nigel: Any other views on that? 16:34:57 last CR update transition request seems to be : https://github.com/w3c/transitions/issues/77 16:35:09 -> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/1189 Mention fingerprinting vectors in privacy considerations 16:36:51 Nigel: The proposal is to modify an already existing informative section. 16:39:04 .. Another point related to this is that we previously discussed extracting the privacy and security text from TTML, IMSC 16:39:10 .. and WebVTT and publishing as a single WG Note. 16:39:18 Glenn: So it would be premature to make the change now? 16:39:27 Nigel: I'd rather be transparent about known risks earlier. 16:40:08 Glenn: I'd rather not be too quick if we are not sure the information is accurate. 16:40:15 Nigel: Are any of the comments wrong? 16:40:30 Glenn: Some of them are about contexts that are not defined in TTML. 16:40:46 Pierre: These are really generic privacy considerations for UAs. 16:40:59 .. Any time the UA opens anything on behalf of the user it opens up a fingerprinting vector opportunity. 16:41:15 .. From a high level I'm not sure why every specification for a format for a UA needs to include those considerations. 16:41:22 .. They could be listed in general somewhere for UAs. 16:41:41 .. I'm arguing from an architectural standpoint that we should not try to make progress on a UA issue in a TTML 16:41:44 .. specification. 16:42:00 Glenn: If you look through here it talks about colour, user preference for consuming media, language, fontFamily etc. 16:42:14 Pierre: My point is very general Glenn. For instance today a web page defines multiple sizes of images that can be 16:42:33 .. loaded based on break points. That's a fingerprinting vector but the PNG spec is not the place to document it. 16:42:36 Glenn: I completely agree. 16:42:49 .. The only thing in these comments that pertains to TTML2 at all is the audio, image and condition bullet. 16:43:01 .. Most of it pertains to TTML1 and as you say, and I agree, it's even more general than that. 16:43:34 Pierre: I think we should try to reply to the commenter maybe along those lines to say "aren't they generic considerations 16:43:43 .. that belong in a common document rather than this document?". 16:44:04 .. Different versions of the same text document in different languages, say. If I access the Romanian version I probably 16:44:14 .. live in Romania but it has nothing to do with the text document specification really. 16:44:24 Glenn: Immediate problem is how to address this review comment. 16:44:31 .. I think we owe the commenter a response, right? 16:44:33 Nigel: Right 16:44:55 Glenn: I don't think we have adequate cause to change the text of our spec at this point to address this. That's my 16:45:09 .. personal feeling. It would be a non-normative change if we do make it and I don't think we need to make a change. 16:45:26 Pierre: I think we should try to avoid an exhaustive list of all potential fingerprinting vectors. 16:45:45 .. We could offer a simple sentence like "Loading this file and the referenced resources from it may expose user preference" 16:45:52 Glenn: My preference is to do nothing. 16:46:52 Pierre: I don't disagree, but as a generic statement in a compromise . 16:46:59 Nigel: [looks for existing statement that already does this] 16:47:10 -> https://w3c.github.io/ttml2/index.html#d3e58989 P.9 Privacy of Preference 16:47:18 Nigel: I think this already does something close enough. 16:47:58 PROPOSAL: Respond to #1189 saying we will not make a change now and pointing out that P.9 effectively covers most of the points already. 16:48:06 PROPOSAL: Publish TTML2 CR on 28th January 2020 16:48:32 Nigel: On the first proposal, does anyone think we really have to make a change to TTML2 2nd Ed before CR publication 16:48:37 .. to address #1189? 16:48:59 Nigel: hearing nobody, I'm taking that as a Resolution. 16:49:07 RESOLUTION: Respond to #1189 saying we will not make a change now and pointing out that P.9 effectively covers most of the points already. 16:49:21 Nigel: On the second proposal, to publish TTML2 CR on 28th Jan, any objections? 16:49:39 Nigel: hearing no objections. 16:49:44 RESOLUTION: Publish TTML2 CR on 28th January 2020 16:50:29 Glenn: Procedural question: I presume that if we get some last minute comment from the wide review process between 16:50:40 .. now and then we will need to deal with it if it is of substantive nature? 16:50:43 Nigel: Yes 16:50:49 Glenn: Right, that should be understood. 16:50:53 Nigel: Good point, thank you. 16:51:21 Glenn: I will proceed with the early merge after the call. 16:51:31 Atsushi: I will prepare the transition request based on that resolution. 16:51:50 Glenn: One more question: On the issue #1189 shall I mark that as...? 16:51:55 Nigel: Do you want me to deal with it? 16:51:59 Glenn: Sure, yes. 16:52:09 Nigel: I'll look at it and come up with something appropriate. 16:52:30 Glenn: Thank you. You might point out that appendix P in the current document does address many of his comments. 16:52:33 Nigel: Sure, yes. 16:52:40 Glenn: Perhaps it addresses all of them indirectly. 16:53:16 Topic: AOB Bullet chatting discussion at M&E IG 16:53:24 Nigel: On Monday's M&E IG call 16:53:50 -> https://www.w3.org/2020/01/07-me-minutes.html M&E IG minutes 2020-01-07 16:53:53 s/Monday/Tuesday