W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-smil@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: [SMIL] A question

From: Lloyd Rutledge <Lloyd.Rutledge@cwi.nl>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 10:38:27 +0200
Message-Id: <UTC199904290838.KAA15513.lloyd@klipper.cwi.nl>
To: herve_foucher@ds-fr.com
cc: www-smil@w3.org

On Wed, Apr 28 1999 herve_foucher@ds-fr.com wrote:

> When creating a sequence will a repeat attribute:
> 
> <seq repeat="3" begin="3s">
>  <img src="foo1" dur="4s" region="reg1" />
>  <img src="foo2" dur="4s" region="reg2" />
> </seq>
> 
> Should the timeline be like this (case 1):
> 
>                  1    1    2    2    3
>         ....5....0....5....0....5....0
> seq        [------]   [------]   [------]
> foo1       ****       ****       ****
> foo2           ****       ****       ****
> 
> (we wait 3 seconds between each seq repeat)
> 
> or like this (case 2)
> 
>                  1    1    2    2    3
>         ....5....0....5....0....5....0
> seq        [------][------][------]
> foo1       ****    ****    ****
> foo2           ****    ****    ****
> 
> (we _DON'T_ wait between each seq repeat)

You raise an interesting question.

Wording in one part of the SMIL specification suggests the second
interpretation.  The second bullet item of the section "Determining
the implicit end of an element" of section 4.2.4.2 states

  An element with a "repeat" attribute with a value other than
  "indefinite" has an implicit end equal to the implicit end of a seq
  element with the stated number of copies of the element without
  "repeat" attribute as children.

If this seq was itself in a seq three times with the repeat removed,
then its begin would be used with each repeat, with the same final
behavior as the second example.  This would generate the same effective
end as described in the excerpt above.  If the repeating begin of the
second interpretation is not assumed, then the effective end would
not match the specification in the excerpt above.

Have you (or anyone else) come across other parts of the standard that
suggest either interpretation?

-Lloyd

--
Lloyd Rutledge                              vox: +31 20 592 41 27
CWI (Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica)  fax: +31 20 592 41 99
PO Box 94079                                net: Lloyd.Rutledge@cwi.nl
NL-1090 GB Amsterdam, The Netherlands       Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~lloyd
Received on Thursday, 29 April 1999 04:38:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:53:25 GMT