- From: Glenn A. Adams <gadams@xfsi.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:25:53 -0400
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Cc: "W3C Public TTWG" <public-tt@w3.org>
Dear Anne, Thank you for your comments [1] on the DFXP Last Call Working Draft. The TT WG has concluded its review of your comments and has agreed upon the following responses. If you require any further follow-up, then please do so no later than September 1, and please forward your follow-up to <public-tt@w3.org>. Regards, Glenn Adams Chair, Timed Text Working Group ************************************************************************ Citations: [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2005Mar/0031.html ************************************************************************ Comment - Issue #1 [1]; 21 Mar 2005 20:41:54 +0100 (1) Why isn't the specification using xml:id? Response: The TT WG has reviewed the xml:id specification in considering an answer to this question, and has concluded that the current formulation of DFXP adequately satisfies the technical need to make reference to element instances for which the "id" attribute is defined with type ID. The schemas defined for DFXP specify an "id" attribute on all element types. ************************************************************************ Comment - Issue #1 [1]; 21 Mar 2005 20:41:54 +0100 (2) Why is the specification using its own attribute[s] rather than CSS? Response: Other than the generic XHTML "style" attribute, CSS actually does not support an XML based representation of style properties, unlike XSL and SVG, both of which do support an XML representation. The TT WG has chosen to adopt an approach closer to XSL and SVG for specifying style information on the theory that XML transformation processors can more easily rewrite individual XML attributes than a complex sytle specification based upon CSS syntax. Beyond the syntactic representation of style matter, the TT AF relies primarily on the semantics of XSL for interpreting the formatting and layout intentions associated with style attributes. See Section 9.3 and 9.4 for more details. ************************************************************************ Comment - Issue #1 [1]; 21 Mar 2005 20:41:54 +0100 (3) Why does the specification refer to CSS2, which has been revised? Response: CSS2 is referenced only to refer to the display property, which is not defined in XSL FO. CSS2.1 is not yet a REC and does not change the definition (of "display") found in CSS2. The primary formatting and layout semantics of TT AF are defined in terms of XSL as specified in Sections 9.3 and 9.4. ************************************************************************ Comment - Issue #1 [1]; 21 Mar 2005 20:41:54 +0100 (4) Why do we need a totally new specification for this which reinvents a lot of elements and attributes? (And CSS.) Response: The TT WG was chartered to develop an XML representation of Timed Text, including one or more document types. The TT WG has adopted vocabulary from XHTML, CSS, XSL FO, SMIL, and SVG to satisfy the charter. ************************************************************************ Comment - Issue #1 [1]; 21 Mar 2005 20:41:54 +0100 (5) Why does the specification ha[ve] so many namespaces? Response: Namespaces are used to manage different uses of names within the TT AF. This assists in avoiding name conflicts, in categorizing name usage, and in managing future extensions. ************************************************************************ Comment - Issue #1 [1]; 21 Mar 2005 20:41:54 +0100 (6) I assume the namespaces will change before this specification goes to CR? Although this is not really the "final publishing of this specification" the specification and WG do need sufficient feedback from implementers before they can move on to PR and beyond. Response: The final values of namespaces will be changed multiple times prior to publishing REC in accordance with W3C policies regarding standardized namespace URIs. It will change prior to CR, prior to PR, then again prior to REC. ************************************************************************
Received on Friday, 12 August 2005 19:25:58 UTC