naming: "sync media" or "sync narration"

[marisademeglio]

The CG is, for short, "sync-media-pub", and people generally refer to our work as "Synchronized Media"; however, the most recent draft report is actually called "Sync Narration", which was an attempt to be precise. We don't cover a very wide range of synchronized media scenarios; it's specifically applicable to content narration in alternate modalities. However, as everyone still says "Sync Media", should we just rename the report to that instead?

[mhakkinen]

I like the precision, but In the range of possible audio books, would there be instances of non-speech audio authored and synchronized as part of the narration. What if it is a song book? Vocal music synchronized with textual lyrics, as part of a book containing traditional narration synchronized with.

Sync Media seems to be more encompassing, so long as some of us don't start thinking we can include that media type which begins with "v".

[marisademeglio]

Good points - you can never tell how people are going to use your syntax. I think sign language video sync (being considered for version-next) could still reasonably be called "sync narration" but I also don't have a super strong opinion, and if "sync media" feels better to everyone (it seems to), then we might as well go with that.

[chrisn]

I'd recommend the more precise name... In the Media & Entertainment space, a "Synchronized Media" spec could well imply video, but also synchronization of A/V across multiple devices (as per the Multi-device Timing CG).

[marisademeglio]

That's also a very good point, there's a lot of media territory that is outside of our scope.

[rdeltour]

just and idea: one purpose of the spec is to provide an alternative rendering of the content, so maybe we can use it the word somewhere? (meet sam, synchronized alternative media).

[larscwallin]

Just a thought regarding the use of the "alternate" property, or indeed the idea of Sync Media as an alternative rendition. I expect that there will be many usages of this technology where the contents of the Sync Media resources do not represent complete alternative renditions of the documents that they augment.

[marisademeglio]

just and idea: one purpose of the spec is to provide an alternative rendering of the content, so maybe we can use it the word somewhere? (meet sam, synchronized alternative media).

Sammy! I can't wait for the sandwich logo to drop. Deliciously synchronized layers...

[marisademeglio]

Just a thought regarding the use of the "alternate" property, or indeed the idea of Sync Media as an alternative rendition. I expect that there will be many usages of this technology where the contents of the Sync Media resources do not represent complete alternative renditions of the documents that they augment.

FWIW: The name of the alternate property in pub-manifest comes from rel-alternate.

I don't think it's a perfect term to use but it's also not the worst, and it has precedent.

So far I've heard:

• Sync Media: pros - generic; cons - generic.
• Sync Narration: pros - specific; cons - doesn't cover all potential uses.
• Sam: pros - catchier; cons - emphasizes 'alternative', which may not be the most precise term.

Anything else to add to this list? Should we vote? I would be enthusiastic about closing this issue and etching into stone a final decision.

[llemeurfr]

Let's have a vote then ...

I has been said before, an issue with Sync Media is its proximity (in the W3C) with terms like Media Queries and Media & Entertainment Activity.

With Sync Narration we use a term which source is clearly the publishing culture. Plus, narration is one of the main properties in the JSON document representing the alternate rendition of the source content.

[chrisn]

Just to throw out another suggestion, the CG name uses "for publications" as a qualifier, so perhaps this could be used in the spec name?

[marisademeglio]

Voted via mailing list, decided on "Synchronized Narration".

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sync-media-pub/2019Nov/0016.html