IRC log of tt on 2021-09-02
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:58:28 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #tt
- 14:58:28 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-irc
- 14:58:30 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, make logs Public
- 14:58:32 [Zakim]
- Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
- 14:58:38 [nigel]
- Present: Nigel
- 14:58:45 [nigel]
- scribe: nigel
- 15:01:19 [nigel]
- Present+ Mike, Chris
- 15:01:36 [cpn]
- cpn has joined #tt
- 15:01:46 [nigel]
- Present+ Pierre
- 15:02:04 [cyril]
- cyril has joined #tt
- 15:02:34 [nigel]
- Present+ Cyril
- 15:02:42 [mike]
- mike has joined #tt
- 15:02:51 [cpn]
- present+ Chris_Needham
- 15:03:02 [nigel]
- present+ Gary
- 15:03:18 [nigel]
- present- Chris
- 15:03:24 [pal]
- pal has joined #tt
- 15:03:31 [nigel]
- Present+ Andreas
- 15:03:40 [nigel]
- Present+ Glenn
- 15:04:17 [nigel]
- Chair: Gary, Nigel
- 15:04:23 [nigel]
- Topic: This meeting
- 15:04:40 [cyril]
- scribe: cyril
- 15:04:44 [glenn]
- glenn has joined #tt
- 15:05:11 [cyril]
- nigel: we have a topic on HRM and I'd like to move that to the end because Chris is here for 30min
- 15:05:20 [cyril]
- ... and we need to discuss joint meetings first
- 15:05:32 [cyril]
- ... there is also a discussion on how we do tests
- 15:05:44 [cyril]
- ... the last topic is the charter
- 15:05:58 [cyril]
- ... it expires at the end of the year and it might take 3 months to prepare it
- 15:06:20 [cyril]
- Topic: Joint meeting requests
- 15:06:23 [atai]
- atai has joined #tt
- 15:07:07 [cyril]
- pal: the HRM topic is really time sensitive and crucial
- 15:07:12 [cyril]
- mike: +1
- 15:07:39 [cyril]
- nigel: TPAC is virtual only
- 15:07:51 [cyril]
- ... we've had requests/suggestions for joint meetings
- 15:08:01 [cyril]
- ... the first one with explicit request is Media Synchronization
- 15:08:14 [cyril]
- ... there is work on progress on Sync and User Accessbility
- 15:08:24 [cyril]
- ... it's a companion to MAUR
- 15:08:33 [cyril]
- they've asked us for time
- 15:09:05 [cyril]
- ... at 10 amET, 14UTC
- 15:09:49 [cyril]
- ... 20th October
- 15:09:54 [cyril]
- ... any objections?
- 15:10:29 [cyril]
- RESOLUTION: We accept the meeting with APA to discuss SAUR
- 15:10:46 [cyril]
- nigel: there are 3 other groups we could meet with
- 15:11:02 [cyril]
- ... MEIG: I'm not clear what agenda topic we could usefully discuss
- 15:11:06 [cyril]
- ... anybody has topics?
- 15:11:26 [cyril]
- cpn: the IG is not planning to take updates
- 15:11:38 [cyril]
- ... if we don't have specific topics we could cancel
- 15:12:03 [cyril]
- gkatsev: we could discuss unbounded cues but we can schedule those as we are doing
- 15:12:15 [cyril]
- cpn: which reminds me to schedule the next one
- 15:12:30 [cyril]
- nigel: in the absence of proposal to have a joint with MEIG, we will not request one
- 15:12:42 [cyril]
- nigel: next group is Media WG, working on the next version of MSE
- 15:13:03 [cyril]
- ... they will publish FPWD of MSE v2, which continues to include support for Text Tracks
- 15:13:07 [cyril]
- cyril: only in the spec ...
- 15:13:24 [cyril]
- nigel: same question, any benefit in having a joint meeting, any topic worth discussing?
- 15:13:36 [cyril]
- cpn: there was the generic text track cue proposal
- 15:13:46 [cyril]
- ... is there anything there that needs further discussion?
- 15:14:03 [cyril]
- gkatsev: it could be useful if we could get more buy in from vendors
- 15:14:22 [cyril]
- nigel: should we start talking about it only when we have more buy in?
- 15:14:38 [cyril]
- gkatsev: maybe we just need to do it offline, but it's worth reminding people about it
- 15:14:58 [cyril]
- glenn: we've been repeating that for 2-3 TPAC, with nods, but nothing happens
- 15:15:05 [cyril]
- ... not sure, it's worth the effort
- 15:15:12 [cyril]
- cpn: it does not have to be a TPAC thing
- 15:15:18 [cyril]
- ... we can do it at anytime
- 15:15:31 [cyril]
- ... no pressure from the Media WG AFAIK
- 15:15:40 [cyril]
- gkatsev: I can't think of anything urgent
- 15:16:03 [cyril]
- glenn: they should start implementing
- 15:16:13 [cyril]
- gkatsev: Safari has implemented and shipped
- 15:16:36 [cyril]
- nigel: do we want to increase communication around it to push other implementors to implement
- 15:16:56 [cyril]
- gkatsev: we can bring it to one of their working group regular meetings
- 15:17:34 [cyril]
- nigel: let's have the conversation between the chairs of the groups
- 15:18:05 [cyril]
- ... happy to ask Apple if they are willing to report on how it's going
- 15:18:12 [cyril]
- ... offline
- 15:19:00 [cyril]
- glenn: we had a few people attend this group in the past
- 15:19:06 [cyril]
- nigel: yeah, I know who to ask
- 15:19:22 [cyril]
- nigel: We will not request a joint meeting with Media WG
- 15:19:34 [cyril]
- nigel: next is the CSS WG
- 15:19:46 [cyril]
- ... there is a limited amount we could discuss
- 15:19:58 [cyril]
- ... in the past they have worked on feature for us, but they are not implemented
- 15:20:12 [cyril]
- ... we're a bit stuck if we are not CSS implementers
- 15:20:22 [cyril]
- ... I don't think there's been any change since last TPAC
- 15:20:32 [cyril]
- ... any topics?
- 15:20:36 [cyril]
- (silence)
- 15:20:43 [cyril]
- nigel: ok, nothing to add
- 15:20:54 [cyril]
- nigel: We will not request a joint meeting with the CSS WG
- 15:21:24 [cyril]
- Topic: Charter
- 15:21:33 [cyril]
- nigel: atsushi is not here
- 15:21:43 [cyril]
- ... but usually the chair works on a draft
- 15:21:54 [cyril]
- ... I reviewed ours
- 15:22:14 [cyril]
- ... there isn't a huge amount that we want to change
- 15:22:26 [cyril]
- ... if we want to continue TTML3 we should be clear about the goal
- 15:22:45 [cyril]
- ... we one thing we talked about doing is creating a version of TTML that is based on CSS
- 15:23:00 [cyril]
- ... WebVTT is still in there and has been in CR for the entire charter
- 15:23:19 [cyril]
- ... I don't know if there will be pressure from W3C to move it one way or the other
- 15:23:28 [cyril]
- ... the last thing is TTML profile for Audio Description
- 15:23:38 [cyril]
- ... we produced an ED but not a FPWD
- 15:24:20 [cyril]
- ... we need to understand the deliverables people want to work on
- 15:24:34 [cyril]
- ... otherwise we'll be a maintenance group
- 15:24:46 [cyril]
- pal: any reason not to be a maintenance group?
- 15:25:03 [cyril]
- nigel: recently, W3C moved away from having maintenance group
- 15:25:23 [cyril]
- ... we could have one cycle of maintenance but maybe not 2
- 15:25:38 [cyril]
- pal: I have a different feeling, they want to make it easy to maintain spec
- 15:25:45 [cyril]
- nigel: maybe without having a group
- 15:26:24 [cyril]
- atsushi: W3C defines a maintenance
- 15:26:28 [cyril]
- ... for example SVG
- 15:26:39 [cyril]
- ... update on specification
- 15:26:53 [cyril]
- ... restricted on non normative features
- 15:26:57 [cyril]
- ... fixing bugs is ok
- 15:27:01 [cyril]
- ... but no new features
- 15:27:13 [cyril]
- ... no large normative items
- 15:27:31 [cyril]
- ... TTML 2nd edition has not reached recommendation
- 15:27:56 [cyril]
- nigel: I'd like for anybody to let me, Gary and Atsushi if they want anything specific included in the next charter
- 15:28:06 [cyril]
- ... we'll incorporate than in the draft for review
- 15:28:10 [cyril]
- gkatsev: agree
- 15:29:01 [cyril]
- nigel: there is also the option to extend the charter, but there may be constraints
- 15:29:16 [cyril]
- atsushi: usually we extend for 6 months depending on how long we bring existing CR to REC
- 15:29:48 [cyril]
- nigel: I propose we don't try to rely on extension unless we have to
- 15:30:12 [cyril]
- glenn: a 6 months extension to gettting TTML2 to REC would be pointless unless we have implementation commitment
- 15:30:16 [cyril]
- nigel: I agree
- 15:30:38 [nigel]
- [chris leaves]
- 15:31:06 [cyril]
- Topic: TTML Tests
- 15:31:35 [cyril]
- nigel: I don't propose to go into the details on history
- 15:31:50 [cyril]
- ... but a keen observer we'll get a sense of why I'm proposing that
- 15:31:58 [cyril]
- ... 2 things I want to cover
- 15:32:08 [cyril]
- ... we have a clear working mode to make changes to our spec repo
- 15:32:33 [cyril]
- ... which is that we open an issue, describe what happens, open a PR, the group has minimum 2 weeks
- 15:32:42 [cyril]
- ... and we don't merge until we have at least 1 approval
- 15:32:50 [cyril]
- ... unless there is an urgency
- 15:33:01 [cyril]
- ... it's been unclear for our test repository
- 15:33:12 [cyril]
- ... I'm proposing to adopt the same process for tests
- 15:33:20 [cyril]
- cyril: agree
- 15:33:27 [cyril]
- glenn: no issue with that
- 15:33:43 [cyril]
- ... one of the reasons we were more flexible previously was
- 15:34:09 [cyril]
- ... during the CR and implementation reports period, we were rapidly changing those and not calling for a group review
- 15:34:34 [cyril]
- ... but now that things have stabilized more, I don't have objections to following the 2 week period review
- 15:35:25 [cyril]
- RESOLUTION: The group adopts the same process for test repo changes as for spec repo changes
- 15:35:44 [cyril]
- ACTION: Nigel to apply to the same protection changes
- 15:36:02 [cyril]
- nigel: next proposal is about test expectations and references
- 15:36:09 [cyril]
- ... for most tests we have some
- 15:36:21 [cyril]
- ... maybe not formally required for pass, but useful
- 15:36:27 [cyril]
- ... generated with TTPE in SVG form
- 15:36:41 [cyril]
- ... for IMSC, they are generated by IMSC in PNG form
- 15:36:54 [cyril]
- ... given that we don't generally require pixel accuracy for tests
- 15:37:11 [cyril]
- ... but things like order of glyphs are fixed and not subject to SVG renderers
- 15:37:28 [cyril]
- ... I'd suggest it to be good to have PNG renderings of the SVG versions
- 15:37:48 [pal]
- q+
- 15:38:25 [cyril]
- glenn: the original reason I had included expectations in the TTML repo is: 1) to give an ability to view a rendering, documented in the readme of both test repos
- 15:38:40 [cyril]
- ... it clearly states it is for sample purposes, not claiming correctness
- 15:38:54 [cyril]
- ... and the group did not review those to agree or not
- 15:39:05 [cyril]
- ... 2) I needed a way to perform regression testing on TTPE
- 15:39:28 [cyril]
- ... at some point instead of storing in the TTPE repo, I decided to use submodules in git and point to the W3C repo from the TTPE repo
- 15:39:36 [cyril]
- ... that made them strongly bound together
- 15:40:10 [cyril]
- ... so if I made changes to the TTPE code that changed the rendering, e.g. grouping hierarchy, changing the SVG but not the rendering
- 15:40:19 [cyril]
- ... I was using Chrome as my sample rendering
- 15:40:31 [cyril]
- ... then I needed to change those expected renderings
- 15:40:43 [cyril]
- ... when I updated them recently, there were questions about that
- 15:41:04 [cyril]
- ... in reviewing that decision to tie the 2 repos, I made the decision to revert that dependency
- 15:41:14 [cyril]
- ... and to disconnect TTPE's repo from W3C's repo
- 15:41:37 [cyril]
- ... it's not the business of W3C to help the regression testing of one implementation
- 15:41:56 [cyril]
- ... so I removed the dependency from TTPE
- 15:42:03 [cyril]
- ... and removed expectations from W3C
- 15:42:22 [cyril]
- ... my proposal is just to leave the test without the SVG TTPE expectations
- 15:42:30 [cyril]
- ... if the group wants PNG, that can be done
- 15:43:05 [cyril]
- nigel: I largely agree with that. W3C are not there to support a particular implementation.
- 15:43:18 [cyril]
- ... also there has not been a review of the SVG expectations
- 15:43:24 [cyril]
- ... however they are useful
- 15:43:39 [cyril]
- ... they would create a more complete test
- 15:43:56 [cyril]
- ... I think it would be useful generally to take those as some form of reference
- 15:44:15 [cyril]
- ... implementations can compare
- 15:44:36 [cyril]
- ... for me a test repo without some form of rendering is not that useful
- 15:44:56 [cyril]
- ... that only applies to presentation tests
- 15:45:18 [cyril]
- glenn: AFAIK the group has not reviewed the SVG for IMSC
- 15:45:29 [cyril]
- ... I'd prefer to remove the SVG files
- 15:45:37 [cyril]
- ... I don't intend to support them in the future
- 15:45:43 [cyril]
- ... within the W3C test repo
- 15:45:52 [cyril]
- ... I will be updating only the TTPE repo
- 15:45:57 [cyril]
- q+
- 15:46:37 [cyril]
- pal: I think there is no need to require PNG or SVG
- 15:46:46 [cyril]
- ... I'm not sure what question is being asked at this point
- 15:46:58 [cyril]
- nigel: are you happy to have a test repo without rendering?
- 15:47:11 [cyril]
- pal: it's much better if it is there, but requiring won't help
- 15:47:15 [nigel]
- scribe: nigel
- 15:47:32 [nigel]
- Cyril: If we keep the SVG in the repo we should be clear that it might make it difficult
- 15:47:45 [nigel]
- .. for others to produce tests - it is much easier for most implementations to produce PNG than SVG.
- 15:47:47 [cyril]
- cyril: it's much easier to produce a PNG than an SVG for most implemtation
- 15:47:57 [cyril]
- ... we should be clear not to require SVG
- 15:48:14 [nigel]
- Glenn: I did actually code up a tool to convert SVG into PNG using a library called librsvg however the quality of its output is not as good as
- 15:48:23 [nigel]
- .. the renderings in Chrome, or some of the other browsers.
- 15:48:31 [nigel]
- .. It would be a degraded PNG but it would be something.
- 15:48:51 [nigel]
- .. It's probably a week or less work to generate PNG from the SVGs that are currently in the repo.
- 15:48:59 [nigel]
- ack pal
- 15:49:02 [nigel]
- ack cyril
- 15:49:07 [cyril]
- scribe: cyril
- 15:49:30 [cyril]
- nigel: I agree we need to be clear on the requirements to add new tests, to make it achievable
- 15:49:36 [cyril]
- ... I don't think we need a resolution
- 15:49:55 [cyril]
- ... but I would request that we don't remove the SVGs while we study how to generate PNGs
- 15:50:06 [cyril]
- glenn: ok, I will not merge the PR yet
- 15:50:10 [cyril]
- Topic: IMSC HRM
- 15:50:23 [cyril]
- nigel: pal you said there is a time urgency, can you explain?
- 15:50:29 [cyril]
- pal: there is now an HRM validator
- 15:50:42 [cyril]
- ... folks are integrating them in their workflow and files are failing
- 15:50:52 [cyril]
- ... we have one concrete report and 2 issues
- 15:51:36 [cyril]
- ... the 2 issues are: one where today the complexity of painting background behind spans is the same complexity as painting the region. It's too simple.
- 15:51:55 [nigel]
- q+ to ask about render success for documents that fail HRM now
- 15:52:08 [cyril]
- ... the other one is the fact that clearing the root container has a cost even if the previous ISD is an empty ISD which already caused to clear
- 15:52:24 [cyril]
- ... I want to ask if there is any strong feelings on these 2 issues
- 15:52:30 [cyril]
- ... I could prepare PR
- 15:52:37 [nigel]
- ack nigel
- 15:52:37 [Zakim]
- nigel, you wanted to ask about render success for documents that fail HRM now
- 15:52:51 [cyril]
- nigel: there are some real world documents that fail the HRM
- 15:53:08 [cyril]
- ... given the purpose of the HRM is to make sure that real world documents render
- 15:53:33 [cyril]
- ... do we have data that shows that these real world documents render on real world devices
- 15:53:47 [cyril]
- pal: in those cases, the HRM is clearly erroneous
- 15:53:53 [mike]
- q+
- 15:54:19 [cyril]
- nigel: the screen clearing after empty ISD, the ticket is clear that it is excluding existing authoring practice
- 15:54:26 [cyril]
- ... the span issue is not that clear
- 15:54:40 [cyril]
- pal: but again, the algorithm in the HRM is non-sensical
- 15:54:54 [cyril]
- ... as the region becomes larger, it does not make sense
- 15:54:57 [nigel]
- ack mike
- 15:55:15 [cyril]
- mike: to your question about evidence, there is no way to quantify that for 2 reasons:
- 15:55:32 [cyril]
- ... we don't have access to all renderers in the world, finding one is not sufficient
- 15:55:40 [cyril]
- ... and the failure is not obvious
- 15:56:23 [cyril]
- ... we need to rely on the argument of what's reasonable, have we made mistakes, ...
- 15:56:34 [cyril]
- ... I don't remember how much it was modified from DECE's version
- 15:56:46 [cyril]
- nigel: small changes were made, but left mostly intact
- 15:57:39 [cyril]
- pal: what I'm proposing to do is to fix what looks like a defect, update the code and iterate
- 15:57:48 [cyril]
- ... see if changes break players
- 15:58:07 [cyril]
- mike: this would be a revision to IMSC 1.x
- 15:58:27 [cyril]
- pal: assuming we are ok to make those changes, what I would propose is to factor out the HRM to a separate doc
- 15:58:40 [cyril]
- ... as a WG Note first and once we're happy we can put it back
- 15:58:56 [cyril]
- nigel: that is a deliverable that we would need in the charter
- 15:59:24 [cyril]
- cyril: are there players that rely on the HRM?
- 15:59:29 [cyril]
- pal: I don't know
- 15:59:34 [cyril]
- mike: I doubt that
- 15:59:49 [cyril]
- pal: when we make that change, we might have other changes to make
- 15:59:58 [cyril]
- ... we should leave the door open
- 16:00:11 [cyril]
- nigel: it's a good approach to structure things to make changes easy
- 16:00:24 [cyril]
- mike: this has been an invaluable tool for real time transcoders
- 16:00:41 [cyril]
- ... people started creating full documents 30 times per second
- 16:01:23 [cyril]
- ... because you can point to definitive perfomance criteria
- 16:02:19 [cyril]
- ... without HRM, encoder implementors can produce documents that make decoding implementations ver difficult to get good results
- 16:02:33 [cyril]
- nigel: you're requesting the go ahead to make PR
- 16:02:42 [cyril]
- ... my summary is that you have the go
- 16:02:50 [cyril]
- pal: and what about the WG Note?
- 16:03:27 [cyril]
- ... start with a WG Note for today, the charter can mention REC track
- 16:03:46 [cyril]
- nigel: you can start with a REC track document, that's in the spirit of the current charter and that's a refactoring
- 16:03:54 [cyril]
- pal: ok
- 16:04:27 [cyril]
- pal: can you create a new repo?
- 16:04:36 [cyril]
- nigel: I might need help from atsushi
- 16:04:59 [cyril]
- ... we should call imsc-hrm
- 16:05:06 [cyril]
- pal: yes
- 16:05:13 [cyril]
- atsushi: I will work with nigel on this
- 16:06:04 [nigel]
- scribe: nigel
- 16:06:07 [nigel]
- Topic: Meeting close
- 16:06:23 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thank you everyone - it's been a very productive meeting, apologies we went 5 minutes over.
- 16:06:26 [nigel]
- .. [adjourns meeting]
- 16:06:32 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:06:34 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:10:18 [nigel]
- Present+ Atsushi
- 16:12:17 [nigel]
- s/Topic: Joint meeting requests//
- 16:12:25 [nigel]
- i/nigel: TPAC is virtual/Topic: Joint meeting requests
- 16:12:57 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:12:57 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:16:19 [nigel]
- s/they've asked us for time/.. they've asked us for time
- 16:18:26 [nigel]
- s/to let me, Gary and Atsushi if/to let me, Gary and Atsushi know if
- 16:19:13 [nigel]
- i/pal: I have a different feeling/[atsushi joins]
- 16:19:44 [nigel]
- s/a keen observer we'll get/a keen observer will get
- 16:20:30 [nigel]
- s/Nigel to apply to the same protection changes/Nigel to apply the same branch protection rules to the test repos as the spec repos
- 16:21:19 [nigel]
- s/implementations can compare/implementations can compare and raise issues if they differ
- 16:22:02 [nigel]
- s/Cyril: If we keep the SVG in the repo we should be clear that it might make it difficult//
- 16:22:26 [nigel]
- s/.. for others to produce tests - it is much easier for most implementations to produce PNG than SVG.//
- 16:22:49 [nigel]
- i/cyril: it's much easier to produce/scribe: cyril
- 16:23:00 [nigel]
- i/Glenn: I did actually code/scribe: nigel
- 16:23:08 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:23:08 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:25:09 [nigel]
- s/we would need in the charter/we could add to the charter
- 16:25:41 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:25:41 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:28:01 [nigel]
- s/nigel:/Nigel:/g
- 16:28:06 [nigel]
- s/mike:/Mike:/g
- 16:28:13 [nigel]
- s/cpn:/Chris_Needham:/g
- 16:28:23 [nigel]
- s/gkatsev:/Gary:/g
- 16:28:31 [nigel]
- s/glenn:/Glenn:/g
- 16:28:45 [nigel]
- s/atsushi:/Atsushi:/g
- 16:28:57 [nigel]
- s/pal:/Pierre:/g
- 16:29:07 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:29:07 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:29:52 [nigel]
- s/cyril:/Cyril:/g
- 16:30:21 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:30:21 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 16:31:00 [nigel]
- scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
- 16:31:07 [nigel]
- zakim, end meeting
- 16:31:07 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been Nigel, Mike, Chris, Pierre, Cyril, Chris_Needham, Gary, Andreas, Glenn, Atsushi
- 16:31:09 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
- 16:31:09 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html Zakim
- 16:31:12 [Zakim]
- I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
- 16:31:16 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #tt
- 16:31:57 [nigel]
- Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/196
- 16:32:04 [nigel]
- Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2021/07/22-tt-minutes.html
- 16:32:07 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:32:07 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/02-tt-minutes.html nigel