W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > March 2005

[ttaf1-dfxp-20050314] exposition

From: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:02:01 -0500
Message-Id: <p06110401be5f5aba2766@[10.0.1.2]>
To: <public-tt@w3.org>

At 11:50 AM -0500 3/14/05, Glenn A. Adams wrote:
>A new update of the Timed Text Authoring Format 1.0 - Distribution
>Format Exchange Profile (DFXP), is now available at [1]:
>
>http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ttaf1-dfxp-20050314/
>
>The TT WG solicits your comments on this new draft

Two suggestions to improve the clarity of exposition in the intro.

I understand that the section is non-normative; yet it helps
W3C gain conformance if it is both clear and accurate.

1.  Lexical order is not hierarchy

Where it says:

<quote cite=
"http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ttaf1-dfxp-20050314/#example">
Note that the flow order is determined by the lexical order of
elements as they appear in the content hierarchy.
<quote>

Suggest it say

<draft>
Note that the flow order is determined by the lexical order of
elements as they appear in the XML text.
</draft>

Because

<rationale>

The lexical order is more primitive than the hierarchy. The
hierarchy, strictly construed, does not imply lexical order. Order is
an aspect of textual structure over and above hierarchy. Lexical
order among hierarchical peers is a residue of the text-stream
representation, not a derivative of the hierarchy induced by element
containment.

Appealing to the hierarchy, a relatively abstract model pattern, is
an unnecessary and hence pedagogically unfortunate digression where
the need is to give the reader something they feel they understand to
tie the term "lexical order" to.

Notes:

Another option would say ..."as they appear in the _body_ of the
DFXP document."

Compare with how a pie-chart layout is a better form-fits-function
presentation of _bag_ semantics such as in html:ul than the traditional
point-form layout.

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2005Feb/0005.html

</rationale>


2.  Expand discussion of (style, layout) association a bit.


Where it says:

<quote cite=
"http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ttaf1-dfxp-20050314/#example">

Content makes direct or indirect references to styling and layout
information and may specify inline overrides to styling.

<quote>

Suggest it say

<draft class = "giveOrTake">

Content is associated with styling in a variety of ways

- by spelling the style out inline
- by inline reference to a style element
- by inheritance from a containing element
- by inheritance from a layout region with which it is associated

Content is associated with layout
- by inline reference to a style element
- by inheritance from a containing element

These associations satisfy a specificity-related precedence:

- style properties explicitly associated with a descendant element
take precedence over style properties inherited from an ancestor
element
- style properties associated with a content element take precedence
over style properties inherited from a layout region

</draft>

Because

<rationale>

It is important to reiterate the 'from layout region' option and its
place in the precedence scheme; as this is not 1:1 with hierarchical
flow-down of inheritance.

Calling inline styles "inline overrides" is a misnomer, as there may
be no inheritable style to override. Further, the inline statement of
style has no more precedence than the reference from the same point
to a pre-declared style. An inline style may be overridden by a style
associated by reference from a descendant element. So the existing
language muddles aspects of the scheme unnecessarily, leading to
future confusion when the reader encounters the real rules.

</rationale>

Al

>  as soon as possible,
>as a very rapid turn-around is expected in order to publish a first Last
>Call (LC) draft.
>
>Please sent comments either to this list or, if you prefer privacy, to
>me directly.
>
>Regards,
>Glenn Adams
Received on Thursday, 17 March 2005 17:33:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 November 2009 22:41:32 GMT