- From: Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:56:04 +0000
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- CC: public-tt <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <E9A92BD0A4FC934EB7935470A46D15241F6AFE3B@DB3EX14MBXC323.europe.corp.microsoft.c>
OK, I’ll add it tomorrows agenda, can you back out that change for now; and we’ll see what others think. From: Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com] Sent: 19 June 2013 10:53 To: Sean Hayes Cc: public-tt Subject: Re: Issue 252. When I filed Issue 252 I read the "non-" as a typo, due to the language "one of two" manners. That is, I read it as having intended to say mutual exclusivity applied. However, you obviously didn't read it that way it seems. I don't actually have any reason to prohibit the simultaneous use of both metadata attributes and metadata content child elements. So if others are ok with "both", then I will restore the original language but with some improvements to make it clear that both can be used together. On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com<mailto:Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>> wrote: In issue 252 you have gone (by my reading) from a non-mutually exclusive system, viz : “one of two (non-mutually exclusive) manners” So <metadata ttm:foo ><ttm:xxx>…</ttm:x></metadata> was legal, and now isnt. Why have you removed the ‘non’? This seems like a breaking change with no motivation. I’m not sure why you want to enforce exclusivity, especially given the schemas aren’t up to doing so? From: Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com<mailto:glenn@skynav.com>] Sent: 19 June 2013 10:23 To: public-tt Subject: Re: TTML 1.0 Issues - Newly Moved to Pending Review Also moving to pending review (just fixed): https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/221 On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com<mailto:glenn@skynav.com>> wrote: Also moving to pending review (just fixed); https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/222 On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com<mailto:glenn@skynav.com>> wrote: Also moved to pending review, fixed previously (May 26) https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/216 On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com<mailto:glenn@skynav.com>> wrote: I've now moved the following to pending review status: https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/218 https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/219 https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/220 https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/223 https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/251 https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/252
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 09:56:53 UTC