IRC log of tt on 2022-03-03
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:59:18 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #tt
- 15:59:18 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/03/03-tt-irc
- 15:59:19 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, make logs Public
- 15:59:20 [Zakim]
- Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
- 15:59:49 [nigel]
- scribe: nigel
- 15:59:53 [nigel]
- Present: Nigel
- 16:02:06 [nigel]
- present+ Atsushi, Pierre, Andreas, Xabier
- 16:02:37 [nigel]
- present+ Cyril
- 16:02:40 [cyril]
- cyril has joined #tt
- 16:02:43 [calvaris]
- calvaris has joined #tt
- 16:03:12 [pal]
- pal has joined #tt
- 16:03:13 [cyril]
- hi everyone. I'm attending a conference at the same time and won't be able to talk, unless needed
- 16:03:28 [cyril]
- first conference in 2 years! Mile High Video 2022
- 16:03:44 [cyril]
- Denver
- 16:03:55 [nigel]
- Topic: This meeting
- 16:04:05 [nigel]
- Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2022/02/17-tt-minutes.html
- 16:04:10 [nigel]
- Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/211
- 16:04:50 [nigel]
- Nigel: No regrets received today.
- 16:05:01 [nigel]
- .. Today we have:
- 16:05:04 [nigel]
- .. IMSC HRM issues
- 16:05:17 [nigel]
- .. Rechartering status update
- 16:05:22 [nigel]
- .. TPAC survey
- 16:05:26 [nigel]
- .. DST switch
- 16:05:42 [nigel]
- .. AOB - is there any other business?
- 16:06:01 [nigel]
- No AOB
- 16:06:12 [nigel]
- Topic: IMSC HRM issues and pull requests
- 16:07:19 [nigel]
- Nigel: We have several HRM PRs open, between 10 and 13 days old.
- 16:07:22 [nigel]
- .. Some need a review.
- 16:07:58 [nigel]
- .. Quick reminder that opening a PR is considered a CfC, and we leave them at least 10 working days, 2 weeks in practice,
- 16:08:17 [nigel]
- .. to allow for review time, and for this repo, when they are merged they trigger republication of the WD on /TR.
- 16:08:41 [nigel]
- Pierre: I accidentally deleted a review from Addison on #45.
- 16:10:09 [nigel]
- Nigel: I think that is approved in reality - adding a note to the ticket.
- 16:10:23 [nigel]
- Pierre: We need a review on #44.
- 16:10:48 [nigel]
- Nigel: That needs Addison or i18n input.
- 16:11:00 [nigel]
- Pierre: Yes, I don't expect any controversy but it would be good to get the input.
- 16:11:38 [nigel]
- Nigel: I just added the i18n-tracker label to it to get their attention.
- 16:12:00 [nigel]
- Atsushi: That will cause an accompanying issue to be created in the HR repository
- 16:12:48 [nigel]
- Nigel: I think I've addressed the review comments on #42, earlier today.
- 16:12:52 [nigel]
- Pierre: Really minor, we can talk about it.
- 16:13:21 [nigel]
- .. The issue is do we need to create terms and definition entries when the term is exactly what is
- 16:13:30 [nigel]
- .. used in another document. I see pluses and minuses.
- 16:13:47 [nigel]
- .. The minus is you get a terms section like IMSC where they all point you to another spec.
- 16:14:05 [nigel]
- .. But I also take the point that an inline definition goes directly to the referenced doc, which might be jarring.
- 16:14:08 [nigel]
- .. We should be consistent.
- 16:14:20 [nigel]
- .. So far I went down the path of not defining terms that are already defined in other docs.
- 16:14:37 [nigel]
- .. Strictly from an editorial standpoint I'd rather continue down that path, in this ticket,
- 16:14:45 [nigel]
- .. and we could have another ticket for dedicated entries.
- 16:14:48 [nigel]
- q+
- 16:14:55 [nigel]
- ack n
- 16:16:09 [nigel]
- Nigel: [clarifies point about clicking on terms and definitions to find out where they're used]
- 16:16:22 [nigel]
- Pierre: Oh I see what you mean. My request is not to do that here, and if we want to
- 16:16:31 [nigel]
- .. change tack, do it across the whole spec as an editorial pass.
- 16:16:33 [nigel]
- Nigel: OK
- 16:16:42 [nigel]
- Pierre: Then I will create terms and definitions for all of them.
- 16:16:49 [nigel]
- Nigel: OK I'll do that, and raise the issue.
- 16:16:56 [nigel]
- Pierre: Thank you.
- 16:17:02 [nigel]
- .. Just one more thing on this pull request.
- 16:17:24 [nigel]
- .. Much stronger opinion - you point out that Respec automagically knows about some terms, like grapheme.
- 16:17:37 [nigel]
- .. I don't like relying on that for terms that are important, so we should make the link explicit.
- 16:18:09 [nigel]
- .. The document should not depend on some weird magic to determine where terms are defined.
- 16:18:19 [nigel]
- Nigel: Right, because Respec's hidden mapping could change one day?
- 16:18:40 [nigel]
- Pierre: Yes, we've been caught by that before though it's less of a problem.
- 16:18:52 [nigel]
- .. Once we're done with that then I can complete the introduction #42.
- 16:19:36 [nigel]
- .. You had a question about the two places where code points are used.
- 16:19:52 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes, we have gone round a loop here where we changed "character" to "code point" and
- 16:20:28 [nigel]
- .. then defined "character", but GCpy and Ren are currently saying "code point" - should we change it back to "character".
- 16:20:34 [nigel]
- Pierre: I see what you're saying, let's see.
- 16:21:06 [nigel]
- nigel has joined #tt
- 16:21:35 [nigel]
- .. We say that a Glyph is one character. I think you're right we should revert that.
- 16:21:37 [nigel]
- Nigel: Great, thank you, I'll do that.
- 16:22:01 [nigel]
- .. The user customisation PR is approved, thank you Andreas. One day to go on that one.
- 16:23:04 [nigel]
- .. Looking at #40 I think I addressed your comments Pierre, if you want to take a look.
- 16:23:17 [nigel]
- Pierre: Sorry about that. You addressed all the comments?
- 16:23:20 [nigel]
- Nigel: I believe so.
- 16:23:41 [nigel]
- .. I think that's all the open PRs.
- 16:24:19 [nigel]
- .. The reason we went round this loop is to head off obvious problems that could come back
- 16:24:33 [nigel]
- .. if we request Wide Review. I think there are no other issues that urgently needed tackling.
- 16:25:53 [nigel]
- .. I think we decided all the other issues would be tackled by
- 16:25:58 [nigel]
- .. changes to explain better.
- 16:26:17 [nigel]
- Pierre: Yes. The only one is #37 where Addison suggests calling on rendering experts, and mentions someone,
- 16:26:20 [nigel]
- .. but we never heard back.
- 16:26:25 [nigel]
- Nigel: Ah yes, I recall.
- 16:26:50 [nigel]
- .. For that one, we don't know what action to take just yet.
- 16:26:55 [nigel]
- Pierre: Exactly, yes.
- 16:27:15 [nigel]
- Nigel: So we leave that open during Wide Review.
- 16:27:26 [nigel]
- .. We could call it out for review comments, but I think that's probably not needed.
- 16:28:40 [nigel]
- .. So in the next few days we should have got this all done.
- 16:28:53 [nigel]
- .. One question for me: with auto publishing, what happens if we merge more than one PR on the same day?
- 16:29:00 [nigel]
- Atsushi: The latest one will win.
- 16:29:13 [nigel]
- .. Assuming they all pass pub tests
- 16:29:24 [nigel]
- .. I will get notified from echidna if any of them fails.
- 16:29:44 [nigel]
- .. I'm dealing with around 10 specs doing this in other groups.
- 16:30:02 [nigel]
- Nigel: Ok, any more on IMSC HRM?
- 16:30:22 [nigel]
- Nothing more
- 16:30:24 [nigel]
- Topic: Rechartering status update
- 16:30:35 [nigel]
- Nigel: The AC review is open.
- 16:30:41 [nigel]
- .. We have one request for a change,
- 16:30:53 [nigel]
- .. and currently one formal objection unless a change is made to our success criteria,
- 16:31:06 [nigel]
- .. and the change requested is to revert to 2 independent implementations.
- 16:31:29 [nigel]
- .. I have contacted the objector, to see if the request for a change would satisfy them,
- 16:31:35 [nigel]
- .. but have not had a response yet.
- 16:32:02 [nigel]
- .. You might have noticed there is a PR open on the draft charter:
- 16:32:20 [nigel]
- .. Pull request on charter: https://github.com/w3c/charter-timed-text/pull/75
- 16:32:35 [nigel]
- .. That introduced the word "independent" and I don't think it's controversial.
- 16:33:26 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Please everyone ask your AC reps to vote on this.
- 16:33:48 [nigel]
- .. It is highly encouraged that every AC rep for a participant of this WG answers.
- 16:34:02 [nigel]
- .. If someone does not answer then we need to gather comments from them individually.
- 16:34:07 [nigel]
- Nigel: Is that for the team?
- 16:35:06 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Yes, I need to do it. If they have not all answered then it may put approval at risk.
- 16:35:12 [nigel]
- .. So please ask your AC rep!
- 16:35:23 [nigel]
- Andreas: Is there anything special with invited experts?
- 16:35:33 [nigel]
- Atsushi: No, not for invited experts, but for members.
- 16:36:09 [nigel]
- Nigel: At the moment all of the responses are from people who do not typically participate.
- 16:36:30 [nigel]
- .. The survey has 20 more days to run, until 2022-03-23.
- 16:37:29 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I have a 3rd Covid vaccination planned for around that time, so it might take me out for a few days -
- 16:37:39 [nigel]
- .. it did last time. So please don't leave it to the end of the period!
- 16:37:46 [nigel]
- Nigel: Ok to minute that?
- 16:37:51 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Fine to minute it.
- 16:38:09 [nigel]
- Nigel: Anything else on this topic?
- 16:38:29 [nigel]
- Pierre: Nigel, I've also reached out to the objector asking them if their objection was on principle or
- 16:38:39 [nigel]
- .. targeted to all of the work products, or specific ones, and I have not heard back.
- 16:38:50 [nigel]
- Nigel: Interesting.
- 16:39:03 [nigel]
- Pierre: Not sure why they're not being responsive after filing an objection.
- 16:39:12 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thanks for that.
- 16:39:29 [nigel]
- Topic: TPAC Survey
- 16:39:47 [nigel]
- Nigel: Chairs have been asked to fill in an informative survey to help guide decisions about what to do at TPAC,
- 16:40:28 [nigel]
- .. which will be followed up by another more definite survey in May.
- 16:40:52 [nigel]
- i/Topic/Gary: It's only been a week since we reached out to the objector, so it is not unreasonable that they have not replied yet.
- 16:43:01 [atai]
- q+
- 16:43:32 [nigel]
- Nigel: It's impossible to know what lies in the future, of course, but please respond as positively as you can,
- 16:43:38 [nigel]
- Pierre: Will we have an agenda?
- 16:43:56 [nigel]
- Nigel: Please respond assuming we do have an agenda.
- 16:43:59 [nigel]
- ack atai
- 16:44:15 [nigel]
- Andreas: I echo the question from Pierre - how important is it to have a face to face meeting.
- 16:46:01 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes, when we have discussed in the past, it's clear that members
- 16:46:32 [nigel]
- .. value cross-fertilisation and meeting people from other groups.
- 16:46:44 [nigel]
- .. In the case of this TPAC, I think it may be one where people want to be present in person
- 16:47:01 [nigel]
- .. to discuss the future of W3C itself, if it has not all been sorted out by then, because there
- 16:47:21 [nigel]
- .. are things going on with the hosts, and a move to a new legal entity, that may need some decisions.
- 16:47:36 [nigel]
- Andreas: What about the agenda for this WG though - what do you think would be on the agenda?
- 16:48:01 [nigel]
- Nigel: Obviously I can't be certain, but I think there may well be substantive discussions to be had about the Dubbing and AD work,
- 16:48:19 [nigel]
- .. and even potentially the IMSC HRM. Those are just from what we're working on now.
- 16:48:41 [nigel]
- .. September seems like a long way away, but experience shows we often end up discussing things we started thinking abotu
- 16:48:45 [nigel]
- .. around Feb/March.
- 16:48:50 [nigel]
- s/abotu/about
- 16:49:08 [nigel]
- .. I don't discount there may be other things as well.
- 16:49:13 [nigel]
- Andreas: I think that makes sense.
- 16:49:22 [nigel]
- Pierre: Looking at your email, and thanks for highlighting it,
- 16:49:34 [nigel]
- .. I think I missed it because it says "Chair's survey" and I'm not a Chair, so thanks.
- 16:49:40 [nigel]
- .. Specifically, looking at the questions,
- 16:49:51 [nigel]
- .. "if you're group is somewhat likely to hold a meeting",
- 16:50:04 [nigel]
- .. I don't think TTWG will have enough agenda items to meet at TPAC.
- 16:50:28 [nigel]
- .. If I were to answer your survey today, I don't see a reason for TTWG to hold a meeting in person.
- 16:50:49 [nigel]
- Nigel: Ok, that isn't actually the question I asked though!
- 16:51:37 [nigel]
- Atsushi: There are questions about hybrid meetings too.
- 16:52:21 [nigel]
- -> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2022Feb/0002.html Chair's survey request email
- 16:52:31 [nigel]
- .. I am not sure if I will go to Vancouver.
- 16:52:53 [nigel]
- .. It is somehow a daft question to Chairs if they can schedule an online meeting.
- 16:53:06 [nigel]
- .. I don't believe it is so important to fill in at this moment.
- 16:53:16 [nigel]
- Nigel: We were asked to complete this, and asked again earlier this week.
- 16:54:10 [nigel]
- Pierre: The question needs an "it depends" option!
- 16:54:43 [nigel]
- Atsushi: W3C staff need to decide whether to book offline meeting equipment, so this is information for decisions.
- 16:55:13 [nigel]
- .. I believe it should be fine to say "it depends on the situation"
- 16:55:17 [nigel]
- Nigel: It's not one of the options!
- 16:56:07 [nigel]
- .. Everyone knows things can change at quite short notice, I'm just trying to help the team with the questions they've asked.
- 16:56:14 [nigel]
- .. I can't make these answers up myself!
- 16:56:23 [nigel]
- Pierre: Can you abstain?
- 16:56:30 [nigel]
- Nigel: I could not answer, but that would be unhelpful.
- 16:57:09 [nigel]
- .. I get this is answering an impossible question, but do please try to answer.
- 16:57:15 [nigel]
- Topic: DST switch
- 16:57:29 [nigel]
- Nigel: Clocks go forward Sunday 13 March in US and Canada.
- 16:57:36 [nigel]
- .. Clocks go forward Sunday 27 March in Europe.
- 16:57:42 [nigel]
- .. Clocks go backward 3rd April in Australia and New Zealand.
- 16:57:48 [nigel]
- .. Clocks do not change in Russia, China and Japan.
- 16:59:19 [nigel]
- Pierre: I have a meeting after this one that will stay fixed to European / US time
- 16:59:28 [nigel]
- Nigel: What will they do on 17th March?
- 16:59:34 [nigel]
- Gary: Easy thing is to skip it!
- 16:59:44 [nigel]
- Andreas: Can we do the last thing as we did last year, whatever it was?
- 16:59:50 [nigel]
- Pierre: +1
- 17:00:03 [nigel]
- Gary: You expect us to remember that?
- 17:00:13 [nigel]
- Andreas: It's all documented!
- 17:00:20 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I'm fine for both options.
- 17:00:52 [nigel]
- .. My i18n meeting will follow UK DST
- 17:01:42 [nigel]
- Nigel: In that case I propose that we do the same, so the meeting will be 1 hour later than normal on 17th March in US and Canada.
- 17:01:52 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I will follow your decision.
- 17:02:07 [nigel]
- Gary: Sounds fine to me.
- 17:02:15 [nigel]
- .. Just figure out what time the most folks can join.
- 17:03:18 [nigel]
- Nigel: OK, it's one week, let's switch based on DST on 31st March and thereafter.
- 17:03:58 [nigel]
- Topic: Meeting Close
- 17:04:12 [nigel]
- Nigel: Apologies we're 3 minutes over, let's adjourn. [adjourns meeting]
- 17:04:19 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:04:19 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/03-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 17:05:32 [nigel]
- Chair: Gary, Nigel
- 17:09:20 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:09:20 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/03-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 17:10:39 [nigel]
- scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
- 17:10:42 [nigel]
- zakim, end meeting
- 17:10:42 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been Nigel, Atsushi, Pierre, Andreas, Xabier, Cyril
- 17:10:44 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
- 17:10:44 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/03-tt-minutes.html Zakim
- 17:10:47 [Zakim]
- I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
- 17:10:51 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #tt
- 17:11:04 [nigel]
- rrsagent, excuse us
- 17:11:04 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items