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

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

From: Glenn Adams <gadams@xfsi.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:32:25 +0800
Message-ID: <94ad087a0906290232v71f0b7ddv20ec32da71019ba4@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-tt@w3.org TTWG List" <public-tt@w3.org>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
ok, that's a reasonable, concrete suggestion; i will add "conversely, the"
as you recommend; concrete suggestions are always so much better than
arguing on first principles, don't you think?

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On 29 Jun 2009, at 09:14, Glenn Adams wrote:
>
>> the "(or transparency)" is obviously a parenthetical remark, and it is
>> obvious that the term transparency itself is not used in a normative sense
>> anywhere in the document, here it is an aid to the reader
>>
>
> The current text is:
>
> "The tts:opacity attribute is used to specify a style property that defines
> the opacity (or transparency) of..."
>
> I think that the following minor alteration removes the ambiguity due to
> the use of "or":
>
> "The tts:opacity attribute is used to specify a style property that defines
> the opacity (or conversely, the transparency) of..."
>
> This way, the mathematical relationship is immediately apparent and the
> reading flow is improved. To me anyway.
>
> Ref:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/#style-attribute-opacity
>
>  and of course DFXP clearly marks normative vs informative sections,
>>
>
> Yes, I scrolled-up to "2.3 Documentation Conventions" and found the
> explanation.
>
> Ref:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/#conventions
>
> Regards, Daniel
>
Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 09:33:11 GMT

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