RE: ISSUE-183: semantics of using profile in a document [DFXP 1.0]

In response to this and Action 

 

 

1. Section 2.2, delete:

 

Processor Profile

A collection of features and extensions that must or may be implemented (supported) by a content processor.

 

2. Section 2.2, change:

 

Profile Definition Document

A document that defines a specific collection of features and extensions to which an instance document conforms for which support is required or optional in a recipient content processor.

 

3. Section 5.2, delete:

 

The profile of TTML that must be supported by a TTML content processor in order to process a document instance is specified either (1) by specifying a ttp:profile attribute on the root tt element, as defined by 6.2.8 ttp:profile, or (2) by including one or more ttp:profile elements in the head element, in accordance with 6.1.1 ttp:profile.

 

4. In section 6.1.1, change:

 

The ttp:profile element is used to specify a collection of used (mandatory and enabled), required (mandatory), and optional (voluntary) features and extensions that are used in the instance document and must or may be supported by a TTML content processor in order to process a TTML document that makes use (or may make use) of such features and extensions.

 

5. In section 6.1.1, delete:

 

If a TTML processor is unable to dereference a non-standard TTML Profile Definition Document, then it must not further process the document without the presence of an explicit override from an end-user or some implementation specific parameter traceable to an end-user or to a user or system configuration setting. If a TTML processor aborts processing of a TTML document instance due to the inability to reference a non-standard TTML Profile Definition Document, then some end-user notification should be given unless the end-user or system has disabled such a notification, or if the processor does not permit or entail the intervention of an end-user.

 

6. In section 6.1.5, delete:

 

The effect of this example is to express authorial intentions that a recipient processor must support the DFXP transformation profile and must also support and use an extension defined by a third party.

 

This does *not* address the earlier Issue(s) about various problems with profile feature definitions in general.

 

Regards,

 

                Mike

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Timed Text Working Group Issue Tracker [mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 9:06 AM
To: public-tt@w3.org
Subject: ISSUE-183: semantics of using profile in a document [DFXP 1.0]

 

ISSUE-183: semantics of using profile in a document [DFXP 1.0]

 

 <http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/183> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/183

 

Raised by: Mike Dolan

On product: DFXP 1.0

 

See:  <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2012Mar/0015.html> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2012Mar/0015.html