RE: [Fwd: SMIL 2.0 comment: 14.3.2 Conformance of SMIL 2.0 Basic Documents]

Hi Peter,

At 09:12 01/03/14 +0100, Peter Stark (ECS) wrote:
>Hi Aaron,
>
>I note that the SYMM group has taken a very different approach to 
>conformance and interoperability than, for example, the HTML group.
>
>Aaron writes:
> >
> > The most straight forward way to declare that a document can
> > be played by a
> > smil basic player is:
> >
> > <smil xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/SMIL20/WD/Language"
> >       xmlns:basic="http://www.w3.org/2001/SMIL20/WD/HostLanguage"
> >       systemRequired="basic">
> > ...
> > </smil>
> >
>
>So there is no way for the developer to check whether the document 
>includes only the SMIL Basic modules. There is no DTD/Schema for SMIL 
>Basic, that includes only the basic modules.

The example which Aaron writes above means that the document includes
only the SMIL Basic modules.
Checking with DTD/Schema, I think, may not work.
SMIL has many powerful functionality and only modularization at element
level, I think, may not cover whole restrictions of basic players.
So we can describe them as authoring guidelines.

Another reason is that SMIL has the ContentControl.
For authoring tool convenience, the document can be also described as:
   <smil xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/SMIL20/WD/Language"
         xmlns:advanced="http://advanced.profile.somewhere"
         xmlns:basic="http://www.w3.org/2001/SMIL20/WD/HostLanguage">
   ...
   <switch>
      <par systemRequired="advanced">
        ...
      </par>
      <par systemRequired="basic">
         ....
      </par>
    </switch>
   ...
   </smil>

Here is one document of SMIL for both of advanced players and basic players!
There is no need of DTD/Schema for Basic at a XML document level.

>And since the SMIL media type does not indicate what modules/profiles the 
>client supports, the server can do nothing more than serving the same SMIL 
>document to all types of SMIL clients.

There is a warm SMIL family with the media type "application/smil".
SMIL itself has content control mechanisms as the above.
Server can serve it in trimming the document with "systemRequired".

Philipp, how is the status of "application/smil"?
Has it been already registered?

>I am also worried about the following statement:
> >
> > We expect that other standards bodies will build profiles
> > starting with the
> > smil basic scalability framework and the host language
> > conformance set.
> > These profiles can have their own doctype/namespace/dtd and
> > make documents
> > written in them directly identifiable as such.
> >
>
>If, for example, the WAP Forum or the 3GPP would define their own SMIL 
>profile using only SMIL 2.0 modules, should they also define their own XML 
>namespace? I hope the answer is no.

I think they can define it and they can use it like the above example.
Aaron, Michelle, do we agree?

Best regards,
Kenichi Kubota @ Panasonic


>regards,
>
>Peter

Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2001 04:13:23 UTC