Meeting minutes
This meeting
Nigel: Today we have IMSC HRM and Rechartering
… Any other business or points to cover?
[group] No other business
IMSC HRM
Status on HR and WR
Nigel: I've been having trouble locating the draft text Pierre sent me
Pierre: I sent it and you replied, I'll send it again. (was Dec 3)
Nigel: Apologies for that.
… That's for requesting WR.
… Are we ready to send it yet? Need to check for open issues/pull requests.
… I will make a few edits as proposed and then check back in.
… We have 2 open pull requests and I think they're both editorial.
Pierre: Yes, we could merge them. They were opened by one of the reviewers
… so ideally they'd approve it. I requested review for both of them.
Nigel: I was thinking that too.
Pierre: We can just wait the 2 weeks and then merge.
… I'm more concerned about some of the issues, like #27, where I really need to hear back from Sam Weiler.
… I don't know how to get their attention.
Nigel: Wonder if he's W3 staff.
Pierre: I'm leery of doing a ton of work without confirmation that it will resolve the issue.
Nigel: Agreed.
Pierre: Who is pes10k?
Nigel: I think we've met him before, not sure.
Pierre: I've responded to them all, and suggest that we wait a couple of weeks for a response.
<atsushi> Samuel Weiler is in PING
Pierre: In the meantime we can focus on the liaison.
<atsushi> pes10k is Peter Snyder (Brave Software) in PING
Nigel: Thank you for that Atsushi.
Atsushi: If the privacy group thinks a change is needed to the spec they will add a label.
… If they have not added it then it is just a suggestion.
Nigel: Thanks for that.
… The question I have is if we should resolve all those issues before sending the Wide Review request,
… and since they generally are about making the document easier to understand, I think it would be a good idea.
… Looking at the issues, 3 of them have privacy-needs-resolution labels,
… so I'd hope that the issue raisers would be engaged with those issues.
… Have we got enough of an action plan in place now?
Pierre: Yep!
Nigel: Alright.
Issues (including HR issues)
Nigel: Any particular issues for discussion?
Pierre: Not really, we're just waiting for the responses.
… I'm more focused on getting the WR request out.
… If anyone is going to propose changes to the thresholds of NBG, say, we need to know that
… as soon as possible because the lead time to fix will be longer.
… My suggestion is to get the requests out.
Nigel: Do you have reason to expect a response like that?
Pierre: Er, if you look at issue #5, span elements are included in NBG(R_i),
… it turns out that there is a practice in some countries of separating successive subtitles
… by one or two blank frames.
… Apparently not putting any space is bad, and too much is worse, so that puts a particular
… strain on the HRM because it requires a lot of background redraws, especially if you
… end up using background on spans, it really taxes the HRM.
… So issue 5 has one solution, to relax the cost of painting background behind spans,
… but of course another approach which you hinted at, Nigel, is to increase the background
… painting rates, and you're not the only one to have thought about this.
… We should not act without data, but some organisations may have data that would
… help us decide what to do.
Nigel: Yes
Pierre: The conclusion of the current thread is we should not do anything until we have concrete data.
Nigel: Makes sense.
Pierre: We don't need to do anything today other than work on this liaison.
Rechartering status update
Nigel: Current charter has been extended to 31st March 2022.
Atsushi: We got 3 months extension - I think that was sent to Chair's mailing list, no?
Nigel: I didn't notice it, it may have done.
… (we should assume it did)
… I added this to the agenda for information.
<atsushi> > Timed Text Working Group Charter extended until 31 March 2022
Nigel: I think aside from updating the Chair details (organisation), I think we've done everything.
… Atsushi, any other actions needed?
Atsushi: I am awaiting reply from W3M. plh says he is waiting for a reply from you Nigel.
Nigel: [checks]
… Philippe is probably waiting for Gary to complete the IE form, I don't think he's waiting for anything from me.
… I will ping him and ask if he needs anything from me.
Atsushi: I think I sent a short summary to you, end of last year.
… There is some concern about WebVTT status - CR is from 2019 and we don't list
… it as an inflight document, and just point to our wiki that was last updated more than half a year ago.
… I think that is the main item.
Nigel: I think it's fair to be concerned about those.
… We should be able to update the deliverables wiki page, if only to add the IMSC-HRM document.
Atsushi: I think it is already listed in the Charter.
Nigel: Yes but is it in the deliverables wiki page?
… On WebVTT I have a lot of sympathy on both sides - I think there has been a threat
… to drop it for at least 2 charter cycles so it's up to W3M to decide what to do.
Atsushi: We could publish a CRD to show activity.
Nigel: But there hasn't been any activity?
… We could do that, but I don't think it addresses the problem.
Pierre: Could you summarise the issue or concern?
Atsushi: The main concern is that it looks like activity on WebVTT has been suspended, from outside.
… There are a bunch of issues that haven't had updates and the latest version is the 2019 edition.
… We need to show that we are willing to pursue WebVTT to get it to Recommendation.
Pierre: Or we could not, publish a WG Note.
Nigel: I think there's a specific "not maintained Rec" status rather than Note, but that's a detail.
Pierre: My suggestion is to explore that, freeze it, and when folk decide to work on it again then they can.
Nigel: Okay, I think it is not fair to have this discussion without Gary.
Pierre: We should initiate the conversation, by putting a proposal forward. It may not be to everyone's preference.
… What about that?
Nigel: We could do that.
Pierre: The two extremes don't make sense - we can't just drop it from the Charter,
… and having it sitting there without progress is not palatable, which is a good observation.
Abandoning an Unfinished Recommendation
Pierre: I hate that term
Nigel: It sounds too final
Pierre: Anyway we should just put that on the table.
… It's called "Discontinued Draft".
Nigel: Yes that's right.
Pierre: Let's just do it.
Nigel: I want to know W3M's view as well as Gary's. Let me start a private email thread.
Atsushi: Again, it should be fine if we can show we are working on WebVTT.
… It may be possible to show our activity or interest by creating a new CRD and pushing to CR.
… We can also state that we have some PRs merged in the last year.
… I don't think dropping it from our next Charter is a good idea.
Nigel: I can see that there have been merged PRs, for example for unbounded TextTrackCue end time.
… So yes, we should get those published.
… Something has to happen one way or the other. I agree with the external view that it looks like nothing is happening.
… In summary, we're waiting for W3M feedback and the change or organisation for Gary.
… Anything else to be said?
Meeting close
Nigel: Okay, thanks, next meeting in 2 weeks, perhaps with something substantive to discuss.
… [adjourns meeting]