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

Re: *Last Call* Timed Text document (Review by June 30)

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:05:34 +1000
Message-ID: <2c0e02830906282005n47c44977rdf4140bac408d44a@mail.gmail.com>
To: Glenn Adams <gadams@xfsi.com>
Cc: Weck Daniel <daniel.weck@gmail.com>, "public-tt@w3.org List TTWG" <public-tt@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Glenn Adams<gadams@xfsi.com> wrote:
> But they (end and dur) can be used together, and such use is well defined by
> SMIL semantics, and has a well defined resolution. See [1] under "Defining
> the simple duration" and "Active duration algorithm". We most vehemently do
> not wish to attempt to re-express or paraphrase this (admittedly) complex
> portion of the SMIL specification.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-SMIL2-20051213/smil-timing.html#Timing-SemanticsOfTimingModel


Thanks for that pointer. I think the only thing relevant to us out of
that 119 page document is the single line:

PAD = MIN( Result from Intermediate Active Duration Computation,  end - B)

which says that the duration of the element is the minimum of "dur"
and "end - start".

Why make people read 119 pages, when it can be specified so simply?

Regards,
Silvia.
Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 03:06:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 November 2009 22:41:43 GMT