Re: [Slim] Moving forward on draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

On 11/20/17 2:10 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Paul said:
> 
> "ISTM the real problem is with language tags in video media. These could 
> indicate that the lip motions of people in the video reflect speakers of 
> the tagged language. Or they could indicate written text in the 
> specified language is embedded in the video. (Could be closed caption 
> text or just signage.) Or (in the case of signed language tags) it could 
> indicate use of sign language in the video.
> 
> But in the end, if this is declarative about what is being sent then it 
> isn't clear whether it is important. If it is an indication of what is 
> being requested, then it is more important."
> 
> [BA] Yes, that is the core of the problem.  As has been noted earlier, 
> the modality isn't indicated explicitly. I'm not sure whether we have 
> enough experience to know whether this represents an important deficit.  
> But we could indicate that the problem potentially exists and that 
> further work might be needed.

Of these, I think we can declare the lip sync "modality" to be a 
non-issue. There is already a way to signal lip sync in SDP. If that is 
used, then the language tag on the audio can be inferred to apply as 
well to the linked video. That wouldn't cover a case where you can see 
moving lips but there is no corresponding audio, but that doesn't seem 
like a very important case to address.

I'd be happy to just leave it marked as for future work.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>     On 11/20/17 1:41 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> 
>         [BA]  This is where the ground gets less solid - we don't really
>         have a general mechanism for distinguishing spoken and written
>         modality among non-signed languages. Perhaps we should just say
>         "language tags in audio media indicate spoken modality and
>         language tags in text media indicate written modality".
> 
> 
>     ISTM the real problem is with language tags in video media. These
>     could indicate that the lip motions of people in the video reflect
>     speakers of the tagged language. Or they could indicate written text
>     in the specified language is embedded in the video. (Could be closed
>     caption text or just signage.) Or (in the case of signed language
>     tags) it could indicate use of sign language in the video.
> 
>     But in the end, if this is declarative about what is being sent then
>     it isn't clear whether it is important. If it is an indication of
>     what is being requested, then it is more important.
> 
>              Thanks,
>              Paul
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     SLIM mailing list
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim>
> 
>