W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > April 2009

Re: Alternate syntax for required features.

From: Glenn A. Adams <gadams@xfsi.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:05:52 +0800
To: John Birch <john.birch@screen.subtitling.com>, <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, Public TTWG List <public-tt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C60CF9D0.A371%gadams@xfsi.com>
here are the relevant links:


On 4/16/09 2:46 PM, "Glenn Adams" <gadams@xfsi.com> wrote:

> have  you read appendix E in the current editoršs draft? especially tables E-2
> and E-3? this material has been available for review since Jan 30... but you
> may be behind in your reading...
> On 4/16/09 2:07 PM, "John Birch" <john.birch@screen.subtitling.com> wrote:
>> I personally would like to see is some example use of the profile mechanism
>> **within** the current specification. Is it possible to create a minimal set
>> of dfxp features (perhaps that closely match the ccforflash implementation
>> for example) that could be 'termed' dfxp-lite and to declare that within the
>> spec ??
>> With respect,
>> John
Received on Thursday, 16 April 2009 07:06:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 November 2009 22:41:42 GMT