Meeting minutes
This meeting
Nigel: We have one IMSC issue (noting Pierre's absence), and a checkpoint on TTML2 CR publication.
… Any other business?
group: [no other business]
IMSC 1.2 FPWD Next steps
Nigel: we have one issue for the agenda.
… Perhaps we can try to cover it even without the IMSC Editor present.
Potential semantic conflict between ttp:profile and ttp:contentProfiles. imsc#506
github: https://github.com/w3c/imsc/issues/506
Nigel: I see that Glenn has given this some thought and added some comments.
… This includes a proposal for an informative note for TTML2. That could go into IMSC too.
Glenn: Sure, I wouldn't mind that in IMSC 1.2, that'd be fine.
Nigel: I certainly wouldn't object to that.
Glenn: There's another note with similar language at the beginning, under styles.
Nigel: I see, in the note at the bottom of https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml2/#styling-attribute-vocabulary
Glenn: I have 10-12 issues on TTV asking for warnings that aren't in any specification that a tool could do,
… for example every IDE or tool chain has something like lint or the equivalent that suggests things that an author
… might want to avoid, and it's always something that gets developed and enhanced over time. There's no standard
… for them, and they get improved. I consider it a Quality of Implementation and competition issue.
… Standards can never adequately enforce everything that implementers might come up with.
Cyril: Maybe having the warning in the IMSC specification would prevent IMSC authors from doing stupid things.
… I'm wondering in practice how many people will do the stupid thing.
Nigel: We should assume that people will always do any stupid thing that's available.
Cyril: The consumer suffers when the author makes a mistake, I don't want that.
Nigel: Are you saying that a note like Glenn's proposal in the comment would be helpful?
Cyril: I wouldn't object to adding the note but the spec is okay as is.
Glenn: Nigel is suggesting adding it to IMSC 1.2 and I have no objection to that.
Cyril: I'm fine with that.
SUMMARY: Consensus reached to add a note to IMSC 1.2 along the lines of @skynavga's comment earlier today. Comments from the Editor welcome.
TTML2 2nd Edition Wide Review
Nigel: I don't think I have seen any wide review comments coming in?
Glenn: I note that we didn't specify a response date in the request for HR.
Nigel: I don't recall but I agree that would have been a good thing to do.
Glenn: A comment for future reference.
Nigel: Thank you.
Nigel: Is anyone aware of any specific HR comments that we have received?
<atsushi_> https://github.com/w3c/transitions/issues/208
Nigel: Looking at the list at https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/75 I don't think we had any response from
… accessibility, security or TAG.
Atsushi: I couldn't find any response on accessibility or security.
Nigel: Looking at https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/432 I think TAG has not yet picked this up.
Nigel: At this stage I see no reason to hold back from publication on the 28th. Does anyone disagree with that?
Glenn: I know no reason why not.
… Is there any meeting that needs to be held?
Nigel: Atsushi posted the transition request link above. I don't expect any meeting for this.
Atsushi: I agree, I'm not expecting a call for transition to CR.
… If this request is acceptable for management it will automatically be approved.
Glenn: Atsushi, have you already uploaded the document to the dated URI in the /TR space?
Atsushi: Not yet
Glenn: When do you plan to do that?
Atsushi: In parallel to getting approval for transition. I will ping plh on approval and also for further ideas.
Glenn: Further ideas?
Atsushi: If he has any objections or comments on the transition request I need to get him to update it or I need to convince him.
Glenn: When do you plan to resolve that conversation?
Atsushi: After this meeting.
… The usual approval meeting will be Wednesday and Friday so I assume it will be this Friday.
Glenn: Ok, so tomorrow. It's almost Friday your time already!
Atsushi: Friday MIT time!
Glenn: Ok, so if there are any issues you will learn about them within the next 24 hours and you should let me and Nigel know right away, ok?
Atsushi: I hope so!
<atsushi_> minutes https://www.w3.org/2020/01/23-i18n-minutes.html#item06
Glenn: If there's any issue please ping me.
Nigel: Absolutely.
Cyril: We just got 2 issues through from i18n.
Nigel: One is 7 minutes ago, the other 3 minutes ago.
… Scanning them, they both say that they can wait until 3rd Ed, so still no reason to hold back publication.
Nigel: Summarising, there's a resolution already to publish TTML2 2nd Ed CR,
… we have a transition request, which we expect to be processed tomorrow,
… and I will send a status update/reminder to Philippe and Atsushi to try to avoid this being passed over,
… so that we can achieve our target publication date of 28th January.
Glenn: For processing, I will mark the new issues as 3rd Edition.
Atsushi: I told i18n what I told us, that TTML repo has 3rd Ed labels so we can use them.
Nigel: Just for clarity, they are milestones not labels.
AOB - (Re-)join to timed text WG after charter renewal
Atsushi: I'm not aware of any unresolved issues here. There's one ongoing conversation, but no issues.
Nigel: OK, I will take this agenda item off for next week.
Meeting close
Nigel: Thanks everyone, we have completed our agenda so I will adjourn until next week. [adjourns meeting]