The word "transparency" as appears in prose in DFXP is not the same as the keyword "transparent" which is a specific named color value. The word "transparency" is not used normatively in the language. I believe there is nothing misleading about the use in 8.2.14 if one merely applies the conceptual fact that "transparency" is the inverse of "opacity". On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28 Jun 2009, at 17:25, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > >> * Why is the backgroundColor called "transparent", when the region >> attribute is called "opacity" - why not choose the same word? >> > > Personally, I'm all for keeping the attribute name "opacity" (I'm used to > the SMIL notation and I'm very happy with it), but I would suggest removing > "(or transparency)" in the text for [8.2.14 tts:opacity]. It's very > misleading. > >
Received on Sunday, 28 June 2009 23:05:47 UTC