[IR] settings position test failing

[gkatsev]

The settings position test is failing because Chrome and Safari do not support position alignment. Position alignment is being marked as at-risk in #460. The position and position alignment test should likely be separated into to tests.

[css-meeting-bot]

The Timed Text Working Group just discussed [IR] settings position test failing webvtt#469, and agreed to the following:

• RESOLUTION: Split position alignment from the rest of the position tests, into a new test.
• RESOLUTION: Mark position alignment as at risk

The full IRC log of that discussion

<nigel> Topic: [IR] settings position test failing webvtt#469
<nigel> github: https://github.com//issues/469
<nigel> Gary: This is the same as #468 exept there are no bugs with position itself.
<nigel> .. Proposal will be to separate position and position alignment tests and mark position alignment as at risk.
<nigel> PROPOSAL: Split position alignment from the rest of the position tests, into a new test.
<nigel> PROPOSAL: Mark position alignment as at risk
<nigel> Nigel: What does this do?
<nigel> [discussion about what position alignment does]
<nigel> Gary: It's a bit confusing which is why I'm not particularly bothered about marking is as at risk.
<nigel> Glenn: Is it marked as at risk?
<nigel> Gary: Yes in the snapshot we're working on.
<nigel> .. I won't remove it immediately.
<nigel> Glenn: Ok
<nigel> Gary: Position alignment controls left/center/right alignment in the writing direction
<nigel> Nigel: That's quite a big deal compared to line alignment.
<nigel> Andreas: there's also "align" which does start/center/end/left/right
<nigel> .. I think the use case you have is to align the text according to the writing direction?
<nigel> Nigel: Hmm yes I think so. Is this the equivalent of multiRowAlign in IMSC?
<nigel> group: [um, possibly]
<nigel> Andreas: Everyone found this hard to understand. I think the use case to align text is met by "align".
<nigel> Nigel: I'm not going to object to marking as at risk a feature that nobody understands!
<nigel> Andreas: We do need to check that the use cases are all met.
<nigel> Gary: Chrome opened a bug on WebVTT that blocked them from implementing, 4 years ago or something like that.
<nigel> .. It does seem like granular positioning is useful. If we realise it is not necessary we can just leave it out.
<nigel> Gary: Any objections?
<nigel> Gary: No objections
<nigel> RESOLUTION: Split position alignment from the rest of the position tests, into a new test.
<nigel> RESOLUTION: Mark position alignment as at risk