IRC log of tt on 2021-11-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:02:02 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tt
16:02:02 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/11/11-tt-irc
16:02:04 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:02:05 [Zakim]
Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
16:02:36 [nigel]
scribe: nigel
16:02:53 [atai]
atai has joined #tt
16:03:00 [nigel]
Present: Andreas, Cyril, Nigel, Pierre
16:03:03 [nigel]
Regrets: Gary
16:03:14 [nigel]
Chair: Nigel
16:05:14 [nigel]
Present+ Atsushi
16:05:24 [nigel]
Topic: This meeting
16:05:54 [nigel]
Nigel: Today we have IMSC HRM
16:06:08 [nigel]
.. And I'd like to add an extra item to that, which is about tests.
16:06:25 [nigel]
.. Also we have Charter
16:06:30 [nigel]
.. And A question about Registries
16:06:48 [nigel]
.. Any other business or points to make sure we cover?
16:07:29 [nigel]
group has no other business
16:07:32 [nigel]
Topic: IMSC HRM
16:07:52 [nigel]
Nigel: Good news, we published the FPWD, alongside a tweet and blog post.
16:08:06 [nigel]
.. Thank you Pierre and Atsushi for getting that done.
16:08:42 [nigel]
.. Call for Exclusion has been issued.
16:09:03 [nigel]
Subtopic: Should we initiate the HR process immediately?
16:09:46 [nigel]
Pierre: Were any other changes made other than the publication date so I can merge the PR?
16:10:09 [nigel]
Atsushi: I edited the github reference and the date.
16:10:12 [nigel]
Pierre: Okay, thanks.
16:10:32 [nigel]
Atsushi: There are some respec issues that made me have to edit the HTML, but they should get fixed.
16:10:44 [nigel]
Pierre: Should I change only the date or do you want to make those changes on the PR?
16:10:49 [nigel]
Atsushi: I think only the date.
16:11:01 [nigel]
Pierre: OK, thanks.
16:11:15 [nigel]
s/Should we initiate the HR process immediately?/Merging the PR
16:11:27 [nigel]
Subtopic: Should we initiate the HR process immediately?
16:11:43 [nigel]
Nigel: The sooner we initiate Horizontal Review the better.
16:11:48 [nigel]
.. I wonder if we're ready to do it now?
16:12:23 [nigel]
.. We have an empty Privacy and Security Considerations section, so we should write something there.
16:12:47 [nigel]
.. It should be quite easy to right.
16:13:34 [nigel]
.. The nature of this, i.e. specifying a tool that does static analysis of a document, means that there isn't really any consideration at all.
16:13:37 [nigel]
.. Does that seem fair?
16:13:41 [nigel]
Pierre: Yes.
16:14:02 [nigel]
Nigel: I will raise an issue for this.
16:14:50 [nigel]
.. I've raised https://github.com/w3c/imsc-hrm/issues/12 which is incomplete, just so we have something in place.
16:15:04 [nigel]
.. Any other thoughts on HR?
16:15:18 [nigel]
Pierre: How do we actually start it? Is it automatic?
16:15:23 [nigel]
Nigel: It's not automatic
16:15:28 [nigel]
.. But there are tools that help, I think.
16:15:54 [pal]
pal has joined #tt
16:16:27 [atsushi]
https://www.w3.org/Guide/documentreview/
16:17:16 [nigel]
Atsushi: We need to follow the checklist in the document I just pasted. After that I can take an action to add to the HR repositories.
16:17:44 [nigel]
.. One minor question. Do we assume the document is already stable?
16:17:55 [nigel]
Nigel: There's one issue open on the content I think.
16:18:18 [nigel]
Atsushi: I understand that. If we assume we develop some section more then it may be better to wait.
16:20:05 [nigel]
Nigel: My sense is that resolving the open issue about span will have no impact on HR.
16:20:16 [nigel]
Pierre: My sense is that any change for that issue will have no impact on HR.
16:20:40 [nigel]
.. Experience is that starting HR sooner is helpful.
16:20:59 [nigel]
.. It should be uneventful because the content has already been published.
16:21:06 [nigel]
.. We could go through the checklist now.
16:22:18 [nigel]
.. How do you want to do it Nigel?
16:22:40 [nigel]
Nigel: I think I'd like 2 members to volunteer and go through and comment on the ticket.
16:22:53 [nigel]
.. Because this should be easy, hopefully we will have the same conclusions.
16:23:13 [nigel]
.. Doing offline more efficient, if we have something to discuss then if need be we can do it on a call.
16:23:25 [nigel]
Pierre: Happy to volunteer to do that.
16:23:27 [nigel]
Nigel: Me too.
16:23:50 [nigel]
.. That's now assigned to me and Pierre on the Github issue.
16:24:19 [nigel]
.. Any other questions or thoughts on Horizontal Review?
16:24:34 [nigel]
Atsushi: Do we want to get wider review from external WGs or external parties?
16:25:05 [nigel]
Pierre: Yes we definitely should send this to ATSC. We've done this in the past.
16:25:16 [nigel]
.. It's a courtesy FYI so they're aware of it.
16:25:33 [nigel]
Nigel: It's more than that - to get to CR we have to demonstrate Wide Review.
16:25:40 [nigel]
Pierre: The Charter requires us to do it, right?
16:25:42 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes.
16:26:26 [nigel]
.. Since this is content from a previous Rec we could try to make the case that it's already had review, but
16:26:34 [nigel]
.. I think it's better to go through the cycle as normal for a new spec.
16:26:49 [nigel]
Pierre: Since we've made some changes we should highlight what we've done and the clarifications we have made.
16:26:51 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes
16:27:20 [nigel]
.. Atsushi did that answer your question?
16:27:30 [nigel]
Atsushi: Yes
16:27:38 [nigel]
Nigel: Any more on HR?
16:28:22 [nigel]
Pierre: Do you want to do tag team on the text to send, and you can send it Nigel?
16:28:27 [nigel]
Nigel: Thanks, that'd be great.
16:28:53 [nigel]
Subtopic: IMSC HRM tests
16:29:46 [nigel]
Nigel: We already have imsc-tests - do we want to create a subfolder in there for HRM tests or
16:29:51 [nigel]
.. create a new repo just for HRM tests?
16:30:10 [nigel]
Pierre: I vote for a separate repo but happy to be convinced otherwise if someone has strong views.
16:30:14 [nigel]
Nigel: I have no strong views.
16:30:21 [nigel]
.. (on this!)
16:30:52 [nigel]
Pierre: The IMSC HRM project I have worked on has some tests so we could use those.
16:30:58 [nigel]
Nigel: Sounds like a good start.
16:31:19 [nigel]
.. Should we create a new repo called imsc-hrm-tests for those then?
16:31:31 [nigel]
Pierre: Sounds good to me
16:31:31 [atsushi]
+1
16:31:44 [nigel]
Nigel: Atsushi, please could you do that?
16:31:54 [nigel]
Atsushi: Yes, let me take an action for next week.
16:32:56 [nigel]
Nigel: done, as https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/206
16:33:17 [nigel]
Nigel: Thank you - when that's created we can look at populating it later.
16:34:16 [nigel]
Topic: Charter
16:35:14 [nigel]
Nigel: I think we're getting there with this - I will need to add IMSC HRM as a New Technical Report.
16:35:39 [nigel]
Cyril: Many of you go, Netflix has been working on a project called Timed Text Authoring Lineage,
16:35:46 [nigel]
.. and it's an activity that we want to bring to W3C.
16:35:58 [nigel]
.. Nigel I'm wondering if we can add something to the Charter for that?
16:36:08 [nigel]
.. Do you want me to make a formal presentation of the activity to the Group?
16:36:12 [nigel]
.. What's the process?
16:37:22 [nigel]
Nigel: Good question. I think there's a fighting chance that we have one deliverable that covers
16:37:32 [nigel]
.. both TTAL and Audio Description requirements, and if we can do that, then we should.
16:37:47 [nigel]
Cyril: Is it a Technical Report or a Rec Track document?
16:37:51 [nigel]
Nigel: Both.
16:38:45 [nigel]
.. What I think would work well is if you could update the requirements and use cases for AD to include the requirements of TTAL.
16:38:57 [nigel]
Cyril: Okay but do we need to do anything in the Charter?
16:39:24 [nigel]
Nigel: Would it work if...
16:39:58 [nigel]
Cyril: Change "TTML Profile for Audio Description" to "TTML Profile for Audio Description and Dubbing Workflows"?
16:40:04 [nigel]
Nigel: That's what I was going to suggest!
16:40:22 [nigel]
Pierre: Can we put on screen the latest draft of the Charter? It's a good opportunity to review what it says.
16:40:42 [nigel]
.. It seems weird that we have to anticipate all the potential applications of TTML that we may want over 2 years?
16:40:53 [nigel]
.. Can we write the Charter so we don't have to explicitly list those.
16:41:14 [nigel]
Nigel: We already have: "The Working Group MAY develop additional Recommendation-track and non-Recommendation-track Technical Reports."
16:41:18 [nigel]
Pierre: Okay.
16:41:31 [nigel]
Nigel: But if we know we want to do this then it makes sense to signal it.
16:42:01 [nigel]
Atsushi: Actually if there is a resolution in the WG we can add anything to the new TR section even if we don't have a finished draft yet.
16:42:51 [nigel]
.. Some WGs have the ability to incubate new Rec track specifications. The WG lists potential specs under incubation in a community group.
16:43:05 [nigel]
.. We can list any document if we consider we might be able to work on it in the period of the Charter.
16:43:25 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes, that's what we do now, which is fine.
16:44:02 [nigel]
Atsushi: On the other hand we can re-charter at any point to include new specs in the TR section.
16:44:06 [nigel]
Nigel: Oh, that's horrible!
16:44:24 [nigel]
.. Every time we have to recharter it's pain, admin headache and we would rather do less of that.
16:44:54 [nigel]
.. I would rather have a more flexible charter.
16:45:04 [nigel]
Pierre: I think we need to write that the group will work on profiles of TTML.
16:45:12 [nigel]
.. If during review someone is not happy then we can talk about it.
16:45:32 [nigel]
Nigel: I will prepare a PR for that, and to remove TTML3 too.
16:45:42 [nigel]
Pierre: Please point me to it and I will be happy to join the conversation.
16:45:45 [nigel]
Nigel: Will do.
16:46:03 [nigel]
Subtopic: Charter/Process crossover
16:46:10 [nigel]
Nigel: Atsushi added this to the agenda.
16:46:18 [nigel]
.. The new Process has come into operation, Process 2021.
16:46:30 [nigel]
.. It allows for a more formal process for managing Registries.
16:46:37 [nigel]
.. We do have some Registries.
16:46:55 [nigel]
.. Question: Do we want to migrate our Registries to the new process?
16:47:02 [nigel]
.. Is that the right question?
16:47:12 [nigel]
Atsushi: Philippe will send that question to Chairs early next week.
16:47:26 [nigel]
.. We could include it in Other Deliverables section. The text is already quite wide.
16:48:30 [nigel]
Cyril: Sorry, I'm not clear on the actions needed to adopt TTAL.
16:48:41 [nigel]
.. I can propose changes to the Charter wording and the Requirements document.
16:48:56 [nigel]
.. Is that all? We could schedule a meeting where I present this work.
16:48:59 [nigel]
Nigel: That's a good idea.
16:49:17 [nigel]
Cyril: I'm going to give a presentation to the EBU Timed Text Group, so if we can do it
16:49:45 [nigel]
.. in 1st meeting December would be good if it's not too late for the Charter.
16:49:57 [nigel]
Nigel: We can widen the Charter now and then adopt the work in WG calls later.
16:50:05 [nigel]
Cyril: Thank you [has to leave the call]
16:50:13 [nigel]
s/has to leave/leaves
16:50:56 [nigel]
Nigel: Back onto Registries, I propose that we say in Other deliverables that the WG will consider migrating Registries.
16:51:07 [nigel]
.. Again, to give us the freedom to make that change later.
16:51:16 [nigel]
.. How does that sound?
16:51:39 [nigel]
Atsushi: I think that works.
16:51:42 [nigel]
Andreas: Yes, sounds good
16:51:46 [nigel]
Nigel: Thanks.
16:52:56 [nigel]
Atsushi: Just a reminder to Chairs please take a look at the message I sent earlier in the week.
16:53:02 [nigel]
.. There are some minor things we need to change.
16:53:23 [nigel]
Nigel: Okay, I don't think I noticed that, let me check.
16:53:41 [nigel]
.. Oh I see, yes, I have it. Okay, I will respond.
16:54:15 [nigel]
.. I think we need to get the Charter finished quite soon to meet the timeline?
16:54:51 [nigel]
Atsushi: HR is running - Accessibility completed and i18n will complete on Tuesday so I hope we can close those reviews
16:54:58 [nigel]
.. and meet the process in a timely manner.
16:55:35 [nigel]
.. We need to finish before going to W3M and have at least 2 more weeks.
16:56:05 [nigel]
Nigel: Am I right in thinking we need to be finished by end of November?
16:56:15 [nigel]
Atsushi: We may be already a bit late for that.
16:56:21 [nigel]
Nigel: I mean before going to W3M
16:56:26 [nigel]
Atsushi: And AC review.
16:56:33 [nigel]
.. AC review should be 4 or 6 weeks.
16:56:38 [nigel]
.. It's already a bit late.
16:57:15 [nigel]
Nigel: I think we should make progress as fast as possible and then if we need 1 month extension on the current charter that is
16:57:18 [nigel]
.. usually granted easily.
16:57:29 [nigel]
Atsushi: Yes, 1 month or 3 month is usually fine.
16:57:38 [nigel]
Nigel: Yes, that's what I understand. Okay.
16:57:55 [nigel]
Topic: Meeting close
16:58:11 [nigel]
Nigel: Thanks everyone, let's adjourn for today. [adjourns meeting]
16:58:29 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:58:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/11-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:04:33 [nigel]
Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/202
17:04:40 [nigel]
Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2021/10/14-tt-minutes.html
17:05:20 [nigel]
s/quite easy to right/quite easy to write
17:07:48 [nigel]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:07:48 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/11-tt-minutes.html nigel
17:08:41 [nigel]
scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
17:08:44 [nigel]
zakim, end meeting
17:08:44 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Andreas, Cyril, Nigel, Pierre, Atsushi
17:08:46 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
17:08:46 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/11-tt-minutes.html Zakim
17:08:49 [Zakim]
I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
17:08:54 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tt
17:25:02 [nigel]
rrsagent, excuse us
17:25:02 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items