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

We’re not chartered to solve a problem like “what kind of information is in a video: lip motion, sign language, captions?”
I think when you signal a sign language in a language tag, we all know what to expect.  If you put anything else in a video stream, we don’t know what to expect, and this working group isn’t chartered to fix that.

So, say that, and only that: “Use of a language selection in a video stream could have several meanings, including the use of sign language and visible captions.  If a sign language is signaled in a video stream, it is interpreted as the indicated sign language will appear in the video .  This document does not define any other use for language tags in video media.”

> On Nov 20, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> 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.
> 
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Paul Kyzivat <paul.kyzivat@comcast.net <mailto:paul.kyzivat@comcast.net>> 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
> SLIM@ietf.org <mailto:SLIM@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SLIM mailing list
> SLIM@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim