W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > April 2014

issue-299, action-254 wording

From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:36:55 +0000
To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Timed Text Working Group <public-tt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CF80157B.1C6D8%nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Hi Glenn,

Did you spot in SMIL3 ยง5.4.5 [1] at the end it describes the behaviour of 0 duration elements? This suggests to me an inconsistency in SMIL3 that may not have been intended.

[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-SMIL3-20081201/smil-timing.html#Timing-TimeContainerDuration> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-SMIL3-20081201/smil-timing.html#Timing-S<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-SMIL3-20081201/smil-timing.html#Timing-SemanticsOfTimingModel>emanticsOfTimingModel<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-SMIL3-20081201/smil-timing.html#Timing-SemanticsOfTimingModel>

In your wording for this issue [2] you use the word 'willful' which in my understanding has negative connotations, that don't apply here! It would be better to replace "willful violation of" with "deliberate divergence from" to avoid this. In recognising that we are deliberately diverging from SMIL we should also explain why we are doing so, in a Note.

[2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/default/ttml2/spec/ttml2.html#timing-attribute-dur


Kind regards,

Nigel




----------------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

---------------------
Received on Friday, 25 April 2014 12:37:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:14 UTC