Re[3]: updated timed-text document

I know, replying to myself. i thought of a better way to express
something I said earlier.

On Wednesday, 13 March, 2002, 13:38:21, Chris wrote:

CL> On Tuesday, 12 March, 2002, 20:36:16, Dave wrote:

DS>>  The interaction of fonts, styles, and 
DS>> character sets needs careful exploration.

CL> With respect, it does not need careful exploration.

Realising that this might be interpreted as "its simple, and needs no
thought" let me clarify. Its a complex and thorny subject, but already
much discussed in other fora. Well-understood solutions that have been
subject to wide review are now in several W3C specifications. The
timed text format should build on this architectural framework,
because re-inventing new solutions is needless work and risks great
delay both by designing such solutions and then arguing for them at
last call when other groups say, why didn't this format use the same
solutions the other W3C specs do.



-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org