IRC log of tt on 2022-03-17
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 16:01:05 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #tt
- 16:01:05 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/03/17-tt-irc
- 16:01:08 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, make logs Public
- 16:01:09 [Zakim]
- Meeting: Timed Text Working Group Teleconference
- 16:01:37 [atai]
- atai has joined #tt
- 16:07:08 [nigel]
- Present: Andreas, Cyril, Gary, Nigel
- 16:07:12 [nigel]
- Chair: Gary, Nigel
- 16:07:26 [nigel]
- scribe: nigel
- 16:07:58 [atsushi]
- present+
- 16:08:02 [nigel]
- Regrets: Pierre
- 16:08:19 [nigel]
- Present+ Atsushi
- 16:10:28 [nigel]
- Topic: This meeting
- 16:10:53 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Can we cover the Charter and TPAC topics first?
- 16:12:32 [nigel]
- Nigel: [iterates through meeting]
- 16:12:40 [nigel]
- s/]/ agenda]
- 16:12:48 [nigel]
- .. Any other business?
- 16:12:58 [nigel]
- Topic: Rechartering
- 16:13:20 [nigel]
- Atsushi: AC review for the Charter is open until next Wednesday.
- 16:13:30 [nigel]
- .. All the AC reps for today's attendees have responded.
- 16:13:43 [nigel]
- .. But some TTWG participants' AC reps have not yet responded, so I'm reminding them
- 16:13:49 [nigel]
- .. via the minutes.
- 16:13:55 [nigel]
- Nigel: Noted, thank you.
- 16:14:24 [nigel]
- .. I think the situation re support and objections is the same as last week for objections (1),
- 16:14:30 [nigel]
- .. and more support.
- 16:14:33 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Yes
- 16:14:48 [nigel]
- Gary: How does the formal objection [missed]?
- 16:15:02 [nigel]
- Atsushi: On the part we wrote about implementation requirements.
- 16:15:21 [nigel]
- s/[missed]/affect chartering process
- 16:15:39 [nigel]
- .. There is one request to change for two independent implementations.
- 16:15:51 [nigel]
- Gary: Can we proceed with that or do we need to resolve the objection before we can proceed?
- 16:16:10 [nigel]
- Atsushi: We need to resolve the FO before we proceed. I believe we have no response from the AC rep though.
- 16:16:16 [nigel]
- Nigel: That's correct, no response yet.
- 16:16:22 [nigel]
- .. I will send a reminder.
- 16:17:06 [nigel]
- .. It is not clear _how_ we will resolve the objection!
- 16:17:20 [nigel]
- Gary: Yes, that's the difficult part. From a process part, it's easy!
- 16:17:53 [nigel]
- Topic: TPAC
- 16:18:17 [nigel]
- Atsushi: We really need to respond about the TPAC questions - on-site/off-site/hybrid.
- 16:18:28 [nigel]
- .. It's a reminder for Chairs to respond to the WBS.
- 16:18:53 [nigel]
- Nigel: Almost everyone has not responded to the email question I sent out.
- 16:19:04 [nigel]
- Gary: I'm probably not going to travel for it.
- 16:19:35 [nigel]
- Nigel: OK I will extrapolate from me, Andreas and Gary and send a response, albeit an inaccurate one!
- 16:19:41 [nigel]
- .. I think that will have to do.
- 16:20:13 [nigel]
- .. What's the response date?
- 16:20:16 [nigel]
- Gary: March 28th
- 16:20:35 [nigel]
- Andreas: Pierre had some comments last time, which can be taken into account.
- 16:20:48 [nigel]
- Nigel: I didn't know how to process his comments in terms of a survey response.
- 16:21:02 [nigel]
- Gary: He said it was too soon to decide, which is why I gave my response.
- 16:21:21 [nigel]
- Andreas: Yes, if I had to decide now I would say no.
- 16:21:29 [nigel]
- Nigel: Nobody is being asked to decide now.
- 16:21:42 [nigel]
- Cyril: In my case, I could travel. I went to a conference 2 weeks ago, it was good!
- 16:21:53 [nigel]
- .. It's a lot of ifs, but if there is an agenda, and nothing changes, I would be able to go.
- 16:22:00 [nigel]
- Nigel: That's my position as well.
- 16:22:15 [nigel]
- .. OK we have a mix, which I can use. Thanks everyone!
- 16:22:51 [nigel]
- Atsushi: Not for me but for the Chairs to decide if we need an offline venue and if so, how large.
- 16:23:01 [nigel]
- .. For me, I suppose it will be difficult to travel from Japan even in September.
- 16:23:13 [nigel]
- .. So for now I should say regrets for on-site, but I could join somehow remotely.
- 16:23:35 [nigel]
- Nigel: OK, thank you.
- 16:23:47 [nigel]
- .. I think that's almost everybody.
- 16:24:13 [nigel]
- .. Gary, either of us can do this, do you have a preference?
- 16:24:17 [nigel]
- Gary: I'm happy to take it on.
- 16:24:20 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thank you!
- 16:24:53 [nigel]
- Topic: IMSC HRM
- 16:25:03 [nigel]
- Nigel: In Pierre's absence, quick update.
- 16:25:11 [nigel]
- .. We've merged most of the open pull requests.
- 16:25:29 [nigel]
- .. There's one more where Pierre and I have been going round the loop on introductory text.
- 16:25:39 [nigel]
- .. Please take a look at https://github.com/w3c/imsc-hrm/pull/43 otherwise
- 16:25:48 [nigel]
- .. I think we're nearly there so it may get merged very soon.
- 16:26:09 [nigel]
- .. There is one open HR issue which we tried to resolve, but was reopened.
- 16:26:38 [nigel]
- .. I think that's a misunderstanding and am hoping that the Privacy & Security reviewer who raised the issue
- 16:26:45 [nigel]
- .. will agree, after further thought.
- 16:28:40 [nigel]
- .. I think we should consider renaming the defined term "glyph" which doesn't carry it's usual meaning,
- 16:28:53 [nigel]
- .. in the HRM. I think this is a cause of technical misunderstandings that we can mitigate.
- 16:29:17 [nigel]
- .. Aside from all that, when we've merged all these PRs the plan is as discussed for me to send Wide Review comms.
- 16:29:49 [nigel]
- .. If anyone has any suggestions for alternative names for glyph, please let us know.
- 16:30:12 [nigel]
- Gary: Should we also add a note that the font does not need to be loaded?
- 16:30:28 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes, I think PR #43 adds text that explicitly says that no external resources need to be loaded.
- 16:30:31 [nigel]
- Gary: Perfect.
- 16:30:54 [nigel]
- Nigel: Any more on IMSC HRM?
- 16:30:59 [nigel]
- [nothing more]
- 16:31:11 [nigel]
- Topic: DAPT REQs
- 16:31:35 [nigel]
- Nigel: As promised Cyril and I have completed a first ED of the WG Note for the requirements for DAPT.
- 16:31:55 [nigel]
- -> https://w3c.github.io/dapt-reqs/ Draft ED Note for DAPT REQs
- 16:32:39 [nigel]
- .. I was wondering if we could and should adopt the same working mode as for IMSC-HRM where
- 16:32:48 [nigel]
- .. a PR merge to the default branch triggers publication on /TR
- 16:32:52 [nigel]
- Cyril: Yes that'd be great
- 16:32:56 [nigel]
- Gary: Ship it!
- 16:33:03 [nigel]
- Nigel: Atsushi, can we do that?
- 16:33:35 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I have not studied yet about publication rules for WG Notes so let me check the document about draft note.
- 16:33:54 [nigel]
- .. DNOE. I believe it is easier than pubishing FPWD but I'm not sure what we need.
- 16:34:22 [nigel]
- Nigel: We can make a proposal and resolution.
- 16:34:34 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I believe we do need that, but I need to check the Process document for what to do next.
- 16:34:47 [nigel]
- .. In any case I propose to ask for consensus here.
- 16:35:03 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes, let's do 2 proposals.
- 16:35:35 [nigel]
- PROPOSAL: Publish the Draft Note of DAPT requirements on /TR as a WG Note
- 16:35:52 [atsushi]
- DNOTE / draft note -> https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#draft-note
- 16:36:14 [nigel]
- PROPOSAL: On merging pull requests to the main branch of the repo, trigger automatic publication of a WG Note as an update.
- 16:36:33 [nigel]
- Nigel: Any questions or comments on those proposals?
- 16:36:43 [nigel]
- Andreas: The first proposal is to publish the draft as a WG Note as it is now?
- 16:36:49 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes
- 16:36:58 [nigel]
- Cyril: As an Editor's Draft?
- 16:37:24 [nigel]
- Andreas: And the second one is for automatic republishing?
- 16:37:48 [nigel]
- .. I raised an issue about accessibility, which we should consider before publication.
- 16:37:55 [nigel]
- Nigel: I didn't see that yet.
- 16:39:23 [nigel]
- Andreas: The image should have an accessible equivalent for screen readers, and the table has some problems.
- 16:39:52 [nigel]
- Cyril: The screen reader says the names of the layer and shape when you hover over.
- 16:40:02 [nigel]
- Nigel: That doesn't sound good - it may need an aria label.
- 16:40:15 [nigel]
- Cyril: I didn't realise it is clickable.
- 16:40:21 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes it takes you to the spec text about it.
- 16:40:30 [nigel]
- Cyril: Oh wow. We should add a note about that.
- 16:40:54 [nigel]
- .. We should open issues about the Editor's Note so we can reference them. I can do that now?
- 16:40:57 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes please go ahead.
- 16:41:10 [nigel]
- Cyril: We should address those but I don't see them as blockers to publication.
- 16:42:16 [nigel]
- Nigel: Andreas, I don't know why the table isn't accessible, I just used standard Respec.
- 16:42:24 [nigel]
- .. If you can add more detail it would be helpful.
- 16:42:40 [nigel]
- Andreas: Maybe you can try it and see if it says what you expect. I don't know if an "X" is meaningful.
- 16:42:48 [nigel]
- .. It would be good to fix that before publication.
- 16:43:22 [nigel]
- Nigel: Okay, Andreas, you would like to see this fixed before publication.
- 16:43:33 [nigel]
- Andreas: If we publish this and advertise it, I think it should be fixed before.
- 16:43:49 [nigel]
- Nigel: I will amend the proposal
- 16:44:03 [nigel]
- PROPOSAL: Publish the Draft Note of DAPT requirements on /TR as a WG Note after issue #4 has been resolved
- 16:44:35 [nigel]
- Nigel: I think this amended proposal will not make any difference to timelines because our 2 week decision review policy
- 16:45:00 [nigel]
- .. should give enough time - oh actually, the pull request needs its own 2 weeks, so maybe that's not quite right.
- 16:45:21 [nigel]
- .. Anyway, I agree we should resolve that.
- 16:46:09 [nigel]
- Atsushi: We may be able to do these in parallel.
- 16:46:26 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes, we should. I may be able to open a pull request for this tomorrow morning.
- 16:46:33 [nigel]
- Atsushi: It's up to you.
- 16:46:38 [nigel]
- Nigel: Okay, any more on the proposals?
- 16:46:42 [nigel]
- .. Any objections?
- 16:46:54 [nigel]
- No objections
- 16:47:06 [nigel]
- RESOLUTION: Publish the Draft Note of DAPT requirements on /TR as a WG Note after issue #4 has been resolved
- 16:47:38 [nigel]
- RESOLUTION: On merging pull requests to the main branch of the repo, trigger automatic publication of a WG Note as an update.
- 16:47:49 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thank you.
- 16:48:07 [nigel]
- .. Obviously please do raise issues as normal if you would like any changes to the document.
- 16:48:29 [nigel]
- .. Thank you Andreas for raising those issues.
- 16:48:46 [nigel]
- Cyril: What does it mean for writing a specification against the requirements?
- 16:48:54 [nigel]
- .. Can we start working on an ED for a FPWD?
- 16:49:54 [nigel]
- Nigel: Yes I don't see why not.
- 16:50:19 [nigel]
- .. We must also validate these requirements.
- 16:50:32 [nigel]
- .. Obviously any changes to the requirements might have impacts on the specification.
- 16:50:48 [nigel]
- Cyril: I will start working on an Editor's draft, which we can finalise later.
- 16:50:57 [nigel]
- Nigel: Great, thank you.
- 16:51:15 [nigel]
- .. I think I should write a Chair's blog post about the requirements document to try to get as much review input as possible.
- 16:51:27 [nigel]
- .. I've already shared it with some contacts, and would encourage everyone else to as well.
- 16:51:53 [nigel]
- Topic: Behavior with controls, particularly non-native controls, overlap w3c/webvtt#503
- 16:52:12 [nigel]
- Gary: I don't think we will completely cover this today but I think that's fine. It's a big topic.
- 16:52:34 [nigel]
- .. Background: the question arises from when there are captions at the bottom of the display area. What happens
- 16:52:45 [nigel]
- .. when the user interacts with the video player and the controls are shown.
- 16:52:58 [nigel]
- .. The controls can obscure the captions, which can be problematic from an accessibility standpoint,
- 16:53:04 [nigel]
- .. for those that depend on the captions.
- 16:53:12 [nigel]
- github: https://github.com/w3c/webvtt/issues/503
- 16:53:36 [nigel]
- Gary: WebVTT right now with native controls has a mechanism to say that the captions should rerender to account for the native
- 16:53:38 [nigel]
- .. control bar.
- 16:53:48 [nigel]
- .. But then how do you handle this with a non-native control bar?
- 16:53:59 [nigel]
- .. Also the behaviour potentially has bugs because it can cause cues to reorder,
- 16:54:03 [nigel]
- .. which could be confusing to the user.
- 16:54:51 [nigel]
- Nigel: The bug part needs to be fixed, because displaying lines out of order can't be right.
- 16:54:58 [nigel]
- Gary: I think it is to spec as written now.
- 16:55:10 [nigel]
- .. It's an issue if you have 2 cues, one for each line, instead of a 2 line cue.
- 16:55:34 [nigel]
- .. If only the second line gets obscured but the first can be positioned normally, then the second one gets moved and ends up above the first one.
- 16:55:54 [nigel]
- Nigel: That's 2 cues rather than 1 cue with a line break in it?
- 16:56:00 [atai]
- q+
- 16:56:37 [nigel]
- Gary: it's 2 cues with each line in a separate cue rather than 1 cue with a break in it.
- 16:56:39 [nigel]
- ack at
- 16:56:50 [nigel]
- Andreas: I second that this is an important issue.
- 16:57:10 [nigel]
- .. I encountered it with subtitles for audio only, and in some browsers the control bar never disappears.
- 16:57:16 [cyril]
- q+
- 16:57:23 [nigel]
- .. Then the WebVTT cues can be permanently obscured by the control bar.
- 16:57:31 [nigel]
- .. I did not investigate if that is spec conformant.
- 16:57:37 [nigel]
- Gary: With an audio element?
- 16:57:47 [nigel]
- Andreas: With a video element pointing to audio content.
- 16:57:53 [nigel]
- Gary: Interesting that the controls are always visible.
- 16:58:12 [nigel]
- Andreas: The question on the solution part is if it is for the HTML spec or for the WebVTT spec?
- 16:58:30 [nigel]
- Gary: I'd argue for both because there's the reordering behaviour and also can you represent native controls
- 16:58:42 [nigel]
- .. so that the captions don't overlap - that may be for the HTML spec.
- 16:58:47 [nigel]
- s/native/non-native
- 16:58:48 [nigel]
- ack c
- 16:59:12 [nigel]
- Cyril: I don't know if this is true for all players, but some of the Netflix players reduce the size of the viewport when controls appear.
- 16:59:16 [nigel]
- q+
- 16:59:32 [nigel]
- Gary: You shrink the text area?
- 16:59:44 [nigel]
- Cyril: Yes, it temporarily squishes until the controls disappear.
- 16:59:53 [nigel]
- .. This makes the text move.
- 17:00:17 [nigel]
- ack n
- 17:00:32 [nigel]
- Nigel: Some BBC players do the same thing as what Cyril said, but...
- 17:00:48 [nigel]
- ... our newer UX design puts the controls in the vertical centre, so that doesn't work any more!
- 17:02:10 [nigel]
- .. Some time ago I suggested an API for saying where not to put captions.
- 17:02:20 [nigel]
- .. This is a real problem - it's not just controls, it can be other overlays too.
- 17:02:48 [atsushi]
- +1 on issue ;)
- 17:03:28 [nigel]
- SUMMARY: Issue discussed and recognised, applies to all caption formats.
- 17:03:32 [nigel]
- Topic: Meeting close
- 17:04:17 [nigel]
- Nigel: Thanks everyone. Next time we meet the UTC time will be different, and the meeting will
- 17:04:33 [nigel]
- .. be at the usual local time for all regular participants except Atsushi, for whom it will be 1 hour earlier.
- 17:04:51 [nigel]
- Atsushi: I heard that the US will not have DST from next year.
- 17:05:09 [nigel]
- Gary: Yes the Senate passed it but it still has to go through the House and the President.
- 17:05:23 [nigel]
- Nigel: OK, thank you. [adjourns meeting]
- 17:05:40 [nigel]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:05:40 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/17-tt-minutes.html nigel
- 17:06:53 [nigel]
- s/a process part/a process point of view
- 17:08:44 [nigel]
- scribeOptions: -final -noEmbedDiagnostics
- 17:09:05 [nigel]
- Previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2022/03/03-tt-minutes.html
- 17:09:10 [nigel]
- Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/ttwg/issues/212
- 17:09:14 [nigel]
- zakim, end meeting
- 17:09:14 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been Andreas, Cyril, Gary, Nigel, atsushi
- 17:09:16 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
- 17:09:16 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/17-tt-minutes.html Zakim
- 17:09:19 [Zakim]
- I am happy to have been of service, nigel; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
- 17:09:23 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #tt
- 17:09:42 [nigel]
- rrsagent, excuse us
- 17:09:42 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items