- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 10:23:47 -0800
- To: Matt May <mattmay@adobe.com>
- Cc: Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>, Michael Smith <mike@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Mar 4, 2010, at 9:56 AM, Matt May wrote: > On Mar 4, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Eric Carlson wrote: >> I generally agree with this proposal, but would like to see the >> following changes before we submit it to the WG: >> >> + We should not mandate DFXP at this time. It has many features >> that will complicate implementation significantly which are not >> needed for this proposal. I think we should help define a DFXP >> profile that is more suitable for our needs. > > There is already a minimal profile in the DFXP spec itself. > > http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/#profile-dfxp-presentation > > Functionally, it doesn't ask any more than SRT does. It's really > just adding begin, dur and end attributes to a half-dozen elements > that already exist in HTML. Maybe I'm reading the spec wrong, but it seems to me that implementation of that profile requires implementation of XSL-FO. Reasoning: - Presentation profile requires presentation feature: http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/#feature-presentation - Presentation feature requires implementing sections 9.3 and 9.4: <http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/#semantics-region-layout >, <http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/#feature-presentation> - Sections 9.3 and 9.4 are defined in terms of mapping to XSL-FO. Implementing XSL-FO would be a pretty high barrier for browser-hosted implementations. It's regrettable that DFXP was not based on CSS layout and styling instead. Regards, Maciej
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 18:24:20 UTC