#1139: WG Revision: Dubbing and Audio description Profiles of TTML2 (for 2nd CRS)

Visit on Github.

Opened Aug 18, 2025

Specification

https://www.w3.org/TR/2025/CRD-dapt-20250801/

Explainer

https://github.com/w3c/dapt/wiki/DAPT-Explained

Links

The specification

Where and by whom is the work is being done?

  • GitHub repo: https://github.com/w3c/dapt
  • Primary contacts:
    • Nigel Megitt (@nigelmegitt, BBC), chair of TTWG and co-editor
    • Cyril Concolato (@cconcolato, Netflix), co-editor
  • Organization/project driving the specification: TTWG, Netflix, BBC
  • This work is being funded by: n/a
  • Primary standards group developing this feature: Audio Description Community Group, Media Accessibility User Requirements, GitHub issues created by external parties (ITV, Yella Umbrella, ...), Wide Review results.
  • Incubation and standards groups that have discussed the design: n/a

Feedback so far

You should also know that...

No response

<!-- Content below this is maintained by @w3c-tag-bot -->

Track conversations at https://tag-github-bot.w3.org/gh/w3ctag/design-reviews/1139

Discussions

Log in to see TAG-private discussions.

Discussed Sep 8, 2025 (See Github)

Lola: Is this the one they know more than us so let them be?

Matthew: Yes, and APA is reviewing stuff for them as well. This is specific tech and APA doesn't generally have concerns about it. I don't know how architectural it is or how widely it is used. Broadcast media is widely used but not sure outside of that. The consensus last week was that they're the experts - and I agree.

Hadley: My general approach with them / TTML, they are indeed the experts, we joined them up with CSS for something overlapping they're doing. So I'm 95% on board with we declare victory and close this. May want to double check with them re concerns for other parts of the web.

Matthew: Checking to see if there are substantive changes since previous review. There are quite a bit of changes listed. Maybe I can go through the changes and flag anything architectural in nature. One is labelled as at risk. Will do offline.

Hadley: You could also just ask them questions, e.g., what do we need to pay attention to?

Matthew: Sure, will ask for clarification.

Discussed Sep 29, 2025 (See Github)

Matthew: This is one of the issue where … and Hadley are the experts. They have given us a list of significant changes. Don’t see those changes as architecturally significant. APA is reviewing this from an accessibility perspective. … My view on this so far is that I don’t see anything of significance related to architecture. … Are people happy with this? … Sounds like we are happy to close this as satisfied. Will put a comment to the private brainstorming. If I don’t hear anything else, I would post it next week.

Discussed Oct 6, 2025 (See Github)

Matthew: Talked about this last week. Maybe I was just supposed to close it. "They're the experts." I said I'd post it "next week". I'll close it.

Discussed Oct 13, 2025 (See Github)

Out of meeting note from Matthew: we said we'd close this - I have pinged on Slack about it

Discussed Oct 20, 2025 (See Github)

Matthew: was I supposed to close this?

Lola: There was another one.. You were supposed to close this with the comment you proposed.

Posted. Closed.

Comment by @matatk Oct 23, 2025 (See Github)

Hi @himorin and thank you for your review request. We do not have any architectural concerns, and note the domain expertise of the group. We're happy to see you continue this work.