Tess: Jeffrey Yaskin did a privacy review of TTML2 for PING; we should take a look at his document and the minutes of the TTWG telcon in which they discuss his feedback.

Dan: Bump to next week and see if we can make some progress

[pending

Tess: I vaguely recall briefly looking at this at the f2f... possibly with David.

... Seemed like changes weren't that large. But we missed their deadline of Jan 16th.

... Might be worth checking in with them whether they still want us to look at it.

David: Looks like the ED is marked January 20, 2020, but the CR is the previous revision.

... So maybe they didn't go to CR.

Peter: They requested review because it's a process requirement, but expected that we would have little interest.

Tess: I'd like to check in with Hadley to see if this would be something she'd be up to. Seems like this isn't a high priority/timely review any more.

... I'll ping Hadley, let's push this out by a month.

Peter: There's an "add module framework" commit - that seems worth digging into

Rossen: "Defining animatable style..." also looks interesting, but it's just handling a ??? condition.

Hadley: having looked at the change history - it's a small incremental change on their part. They are pinging the TAG for horizontal review. The deadline may have lapsed. There are semantic changes and syntactic changes. I don't see issues with either. I think this is isolated to TTML2. They do remove XML base...

Tess: As an HTML person that sounds good.

Hadley: I feel comfortable greenlighting this.

Tess: The only places I can think of - edge had a subset but with the chromium adoption might be moot The 2nd is no browser that I know of implements but a bunch of fairly big sites use IMSC1, a profile of TTML. BBC uses this. Don't know that profile is tracking this change. Don't know if they've done the due diligence.

Hadley: my guess would be that the group has done it.

Dan: propose close in that case?

[Hadley to write closing statement.