16:00:50 RRSAgent has joined #tt 16:00:51 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/01/07-tt-irc 16:00:53 RRSAgent, make logs Public 16:00:54 Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference 16:02:08 Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2020/12/17-tt-minutes.html 16:03:11 scribe: nigel 16:03:16 Present: Andreas, Nigel, Gary 16:03:20 Chair: Nigel, Gary 16:03:28 Regrets: Cyril 16:03:54 Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/171 16:04:03 Present+ Atsushi 16:04:12 Topic: This meeting 16:04:56 Nigel: Today I only put one item on the agenda! Which is what we aim to do this year 16:04:58 Present+ Pierre 16:06:14 .. Any other business? 16:06:29 group: [no other business] 16:06:35 Agenda: 2021 Workplan 16:07:03 Nigel: End of last year, I asked what members want to achieve. 16:07:23 .. Our group has fewer participants than before so I think it makes sense to try to focus 16:07:43 .. on a small number of achievable goals (e.g. 1), do those and then move on to the next thing. 16:07:50 .. Happy to have an open conversation about this. 16:08:25 .. For me, coming off the back of the last meeting, I think there are several useful achievable things, 16:08:30 .. and prioritising them is important. 16:08:32 .. For example: 16:08:56 .. * Customisation semantics for captions and subtitles 16:09:04 .. * Just getting TTML2 to Rec? 16:09:18 .. * ADPT to CR 16:09:41 .. Those are just three from me. Can I open the floor - any comments or suggestions, or desires? 16:09:53 Gary: For me, it would be to move WebVTT forward. 16:10:02 Nigel: What do you mean by that? 16:10:11 Gary: There are a bunch of pull requests that need to be addressed. 16:10:23 .. Basically get WebVTT into a place where we can move it towards PR, 16:10:39 .. particularly with the live standard addition, with all the features pared down to what 16:10:48 .. is deployed, so then we can start adding the features that should be in but 16:10:53 .. are not yet available, after the fact. 16:11:05 Nigel: So marking some features as "candidate" status? 16:11:06 Gary: Yes 16:12:08 s/Custom/User custom 16:14:07 Nigel: On the user customisation front, I've implemented a prototype of all the options in CTA-CEB35 on top of imsc.js 16:14:30 .. and it made me wonder if we need to define semantics for user customisation that can work interoperably across players. 16:14:36 Gary: For TTML and WebVTT? 16:14:38 Nigel: Yes 16:15:05 Gary: Having a single place that defines what possible user customisations should be would be grear 16:15:16 .. and we may want it to go into detail about how it applies to TTML and WebVTT as well. 16:15:34 .. Alternatively we could just list out the customisation options and then WebVTT and TTML can reference that and 16:15:40 .. say how they apply to themselves. 16:15:51 s/grear/great 16:16:11 Andreas: Regarding the first, to gather information about how subtitle customisation should look, are you thinking of a general document 16:16:18 .. that would be applicable to any captioning format? 16:16:22 Gary: Yes I don't see why not 16:16:41 .. If it makes sense. We could always say "if it only makes sense to format X" for some reason, then mark it as such. 16:16:55 .. For most of the standard stuff we're used to it doesn't matter what caption format it is coming from. 16:18:07 Nigel: One question is whether the customisation should be only at the presentation side or should be 16:18:21 .. constrained to style attributes and properties that are already available in the format. 16:18:35 Andreas: This could be an interesting part, how to deal with customisation requests that aren't supported in the incoming format. 16:18:48 .. And how to deal with customisation requests that would contradict the author's intention. 16:19:09 .. Those are all cases that we meet in operation. If we see for example the existing options available in 16:19:29 .. our OSes or TVs they may possibly not really look at the author's intention or what the incoming format is capable of. 16:22:19 Nigel: My go-to example for that is text colours, where a one colour outcome is too simple, and users in the UK anyway need to see different 16:23:05 .. colours, and authors set colour as an intent. So I implemented a colour map customisation to set a palette. 16:24:27 Andreas: And there's a need for the user to say whether they want to override what's set, or only set if something is missing. 16:24:34 Gary: That's what the Apple model is. 16:25:02 Nigel: I find it hard to understand given that in TTML anyway almost all the style attributes have a default value, so how would 16:25:21 .. the system know if the author's intent was captured by deliberate omission or by specifying something? 16:25:51 Andreas: We should start with concrete examples and match against common practices in different countries, and also try it out against 16:25:56 .. existing customisation interfaces. 16:26:11 .. From there we could get a feeling what direction we could head with our documents and try to work out some 16:26:15 .. first recommendations. 16:26:53 Nigel: What I had hoped might be a small achievable goal seems to have escalated very quickly into a very big complicated 16:27:01 .. goal that isn't easily achievable, which is probably reasonable! 16:27:25 Gary: You'd start off with a set of knowns, like FCC, CVAA etc and consolidate into one document, and work out what that means, 16:27:31 .. rather than doing everything at once. 16:27:41 .. Then get deeper after that. 16:27:46 NIgel: Yes, I think that's right. 16:28:03 Gary: Otherwise we'll never get anything done. 16:28:06 s/NIg/Nig 16:29:41 Nigel: CTA already did a lot of this, but at a lightweight level from a technical perspective, and there are also the MAURs. 16:29:57 .. The question is whether this group should do anything beyond that. 16:30:23 Andreas: We should look at non-US sources too, like in Europe. In Germany all HbbTV subtitles are customisable but it's not mandated or written down. 16:30:32 Nigel: Something is written down though? 16:30:47 Andreas: Yes, for example HbbTV subtitles are based on user tests made in different EU funded projects. 16:30:52 .. So there are sources for that. 16:31:10 Gary: Definitely this shouldn't just be a US-UK subtitle user customisation options. 16:31:12 Nigel: +1 16:31:34 Pierre: The first step might be to collect all this information in one place, if it is already done. 16:31:46 Nigel: That could be published as a WG Note very easily. 16:32:02 Pierre: From an implementation perspective the pitfall to avoid is doing something from one territory, and then 16:32:12 .. someone says "what about here" and then the API gets more and more complicated. 16:32:20 .. To deal with all the different models. 16:32:30 .. If we could rationalise all the existing practices that would be ideal. 16:32:43 .. Maybe start with a subset of all those practices. But in my mind the goal is to avoid 16:32:55 .. 3 or 4 APIs, one for each style of customisation, if it can be avoided. 16:34:08 Nigel: I also wondered if there are any topics where we should have a "virtual f2f" meeting, maybe a couple of 3 hour calls in a week. 16:34:40 Pierre: If we can frame the customisation question in a good way then it could make sense to share that more widely 16:35:02 .. and invite a wider group of interested people in to discuss in a "workshop" (but don't call it that). 16:35:26 Nigel: Agree 16:36:09 Nigel: The in-flight Rec activities that are not at "stage 1" are TTML2 CR and WebVTT CR 16:36:31 .. Speeding up TTML2 would need us to go and do a load of implementation work, possibly. 16:36:52 .. Gary has already explained the idea for WebVTT which sounds achievable. 16:37:19 .. Are there any other candidates for things to work on? 16:37:31 Gary: There's working with CSS WG around viewport units in the video element. 16:37:37 Nigel: Yes, thank you for the reminder. 16:38:51 .. The other CSS related thing is trying to advance e.g. fillLineGap, where it's in need of tests and implementation. 16:39:03 .. I'm not comfortable saying that's the activity of this group, but it could be that the members of this group are 16:39:19 .. motivated to push it on, and if that takes up their time it could be a bit distracting, albeit useful. 16:40:47 .. From my own point of view, I'm struggling to prioritise subtitle customisation vs the AD profile of TTML2; 16:41:08 .. in the BBC anyway it may be easier to get momentum from others on subtitle customisation, which may steer me. 16:42:07 Nigel: What do you think of the general idea of trying to narrow down our activities to a small number of deliverables and focus on them? 16:42:12 .. Does it seem like a sensible approach? 16:42:23 Pierre: Can you summarise what's left in TTML2 to get to publication? 16:42:38 Nigel: It's completing the CR Exit Criteria for the Implementation Report. 16:42:47 Pierre: What's missing? Is it easy or hard? 16:43:15 .. It'd be nice to finish that spec. These other things are interesting but they could be a lot of work. 16:47:47 Nigel: The CR Exit Criteria say no feature is added/removed so none is at risk, but 2 independent implementations are needed for each 16:47:50 .. modified feature. 16:48:31 .. The Implementation Report shows 1 passing implementation for all the validation tests, but only 1 for one of the presentation tests. 16:48:47 .. If we had 2 implementations for every test it would be totally straightforward, but we're a long way from that. 16:49:33 Pierre: Is it possible to switch to the candidate feature mode? It's not good to have this hanging. 16:49:47 Nigel: I'm not sure we're allowed actually, to introduce that to an existing Rec. 16:50:00 Pierre: We could go back to WD and round the loop? 16:50:08 Nigel: Yes but we'd have to call it something other than TTML2, I suspect. 16:51:14 Pierre: We don't have to have two passes for every test? 16:51:58 Nigel: No, if we could refactor from features to tests we could possibly show that 1 validation test and 1 presentation test count as 2 passes. 16:52:08 .. But right now that could only possibly affect one feature. 16:52:20 Pierre: I'll look at the presentation tests, it may be that we have some options. 16:53:25 Nigel: It seems to me from this conversation that we have quite strong motivation to push WebVTT and TTML2 on, and 16:53:51 .. also good energy behind starting small with customisation in a way that can be extended later. 16:54:17 .. And user customisation could be a good topic for an extended meeting of some form (extended in time and attendees). 16:55:02 Topic: Meeting close 16:55:21 Nigel: Thanks, this has been useful. Our next call is in 2 weeks. In that time I may be able to look at the TTML2 IR and pull it apart to 16:55:29 .. work out what we really need to achieve to meet the exit criteria. 16:56:48 .. Thanks everyone, happy new year again, see you in 2 weeks. [adjourns meeting] 16:57:04 group: [general wishes of happy new year] 16:57:09 rrsagent, make minutes v2 16:57:09 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/07-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:07:16 s/Agenda: 2021/Topic: 2021 17:10:30 rrsagent, make minutes v2 17:10:30 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/07-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:13:34 scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics 17:13:36 rrsagent, make minutes v2 17:13:36 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/07-tt-minutes.html nigel 17:27:45 zakim, end meeting 17:27:45 As of this point the attendees have been Andreas, Nigel, Gary, Atsushi, Pierre 17:27:47 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 17:27:47 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/07-tt-minutes.html Zakim 17:27:50 I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 17:27:54 Zakim has left #tt 17:27:55 rrsagent, excuse us 17:27:55 I see no action items