W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > November 2012

RE: Issue 1 for R0007 Raised with Issue-182 (...WAS: RE: Update to Issue-182 Proposal and Completion of Action-117)

From: Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH) <momartin@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:37:04 +0000
To: "Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH)" <momartin@microsoft.com>, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, "'public-tt@w3.org'" <public-tt@w3.org>
CC: Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, "Michael A Dolan (mdolan@newtbt.com)" <mdolan@newtbt.com>
Message-ID: <dabb4ca973ba426e981ea30a1c46b118@BY2PR03MB059.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
TTWG to To: Line.

-----Original Message-----
From: Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH) [mailto:momartin@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:02 PM
To: Glenn Adams
Cc: public-tt@w3.org; Sean Hayes; Michael A Dolan (mdolan@newtbt.com)
Subject: Issue 1 for R0007 Raised with Issue-182 (...WAS: RE: Update to Issue-182 Proposal and Completion of Action-117)

On R0007, Glenn to answer your question.[1, see ***....***] 

Suggest this statement basically from TTML 1.0:

   If a reference to an element type is used in this specification and the name of the element type is not namespace qualified, then the default TT Namespace applies. The 
   semantics on use of namespaces (for example, use of ttp:profile) defined in TTML 1.0 apply.

Thanks.

--------------
[1] Issue 2
Constraint R0007 is at risk. The addition of ttp:profile to the above list makes it apparent that references to TTML element types in this document are incompletely specified due the absence of a prefix or language elsewhere that defines the namespace that applies. In other words, ***there needs to be language that says that an unqualified element type name belongs to the namespace associated with the tt prefix or a tt prefix needs to be added to each usage in this document.***

-----Original Message-----
From: Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH) [mailto:momartin@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:16 PM
To: Glenn Adams
Cc: public-tt@w3.org; Sean Hayes; Michael A Dolan (mdolan@newtbt.com)
Subject: RE: Update to Issue-182 Proposal and Completion of Action-117

Suggest you add these elements to the bulleted list for R0007. The ttp:profile is already present.
        features
        feature
        extensions
        extension

Then, we can address your Issue with R0007 separately.

Thanks.

From: Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 9:34 AM
To: Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH)
Cc: public-tt@w3.org; Sean Hayes; Michael A Dolan (mdolan@newtbt.com)
Subject: Re: Update to Issue-182 Proposal and Completion of Action-117

Sorry, I still don't understand. Please provide explicit editing instructions.
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH) <momartin@microsoft.com> wrote:
Each feature has its own section. We need to add #profile as a feature in SDP-US, and use the elements defined in TTML. Each feature has a section with such a table.

Thanks.

From: Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2012 3:35 PM
To: Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH)
Cc: public-tt@w3.org; Sean Hayes; Michael A Dolan (mdolan@newtbt.com)
Subject: Re: Update to Issue-182 Proposal and Completion of Action-117

Implemented original proposal at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/rev/108c8bf20b6d.


However, I don't understand the editing instructions below for an updated proposal. Please be more specific regarding "adding a table" and its contents.
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH) <momartin@microsoft.com> wrote:
Updated proposal to close Issue-182 and Action-117.

Addresses concerns raised by TTWG Oct 18 to add elements required to support ttp:profile element as defined in TTML 1.0.

Add a table for #profile as a required SDP-US feature.
1. Add #profile feature.
2. Set Usage Type as required.
3. Add under Context of Use:
        profile
        features
        feature
        extensions
        extension

No other restrictions apply.

-----Original Message-----
From: Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH) [mailto:momartin@microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:48 PM
To: 'public-tt@w3.org'; Sean Hayes
Subject: Update to Issue-182 Proposal

Here is an updated proposal that replaces the initial proposal in Issue-182: http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/182.


Section 1
Change from: Claims of conformance MUST use this URI and implement the required features and constraints of use and processing outlined in this profile.
Change to:
Claims of document conformance MUST use this URI defined in this profile.
Claims of presentation processor conformance MUST implement the required features and constraints of use and processing outlined in this profile.

Add 2nd bullet to this sentence:
Conformance to this profile does not preclude the:
*       Use of other features defined in TTML 1.0. Such behavior is not defined here.
*       Use of other profiles that may implement the features in this profile.

Section 5.4.2
Add to Note (1). NOTE: See also Conformance.  TTML 1.0 allows zero or more profiles (ttp:profile in the head element) to be specified and used simultaneously. A presentation processor may reject documents it does not understand.

Add to Note (2). NOTE: When the use attribute is used on the ttp:profile element could indicate the geographical region for which the profile is used. For example, specific styling capabilities could be used in a particular geographical region. See also Other Constraints.

Requirement R0007
Add ttp:profile element.

Add in Error Handling section:
Note: A presentation processor is not required to reject a document if the profile URI is not recognized. A document is rejected if it contains an unknown required feature and the presentation processor does not implement that feature.

Monica






Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 14:39:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:06 UTC