- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 18:33:52 +0100
- To: Chet Haase <Chet.Haase@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-smil@w3.org
* Chet Haase wrote: >I'll stick to my original assertion about the SMIL spec's vagueness >over the keySplines assumptions. It makes sense to me now that I've >worked through it, but I didn't find the language here: > >> QUOTE: "The keyTimes values that define the associated segment are >> the >> Bezier "anchor points", and the keySplines values are the control >> points." > >very obvious in determining that the anchor points are >(0,0) and (1,1). Nor did the short dereference to Foley, vanDam >help in figuring how to determine what we're actually trying >to calculate with keySplines. Could you raise this issue in a separate message, possible proposing alternate text that could be incorporated into the SMIL 2.1 errata? Thanks, -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Saturday, 18 March 2006 17:35:03 UTC