- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 18:38:52 -0600
- To: Michael A Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com>
- Cc: public-tt <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+cUkik-iof2xGo6jHg1YxxmqnCz5HhRGsgCbw7bph2L0g@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Michael A Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com> wrote: > Alpha, used for opacity, is defined to be any real number. The prose goes > on to say: If the value represented is less than 0.0, then it must be > interpreted as equal to 0.0; similarly, if the value represented is greater > than 1.0, then it must be interpreted as 1.0. > I did it this way because that's how CSS3 Color defined <alphavalue> [1]. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/#transparency > **** > > ** ** > > The schema datatypes module defines:**** > > ** ** > > **1. **“alpha” but constrains it to 0-1. A good idea, but wrong. > Why this is "wrong"? > **** > > **2. **“opacity” as xs:string (doesn’t use “alpha”)**** > > ** ** > > I can’t think of why a dataype, “alpha”, should be other than 0-1, and it > is not used for anything else in TTML. So I propose: > > **** > > **1. **The prose be changed to constrain it to 0-1 and remove the > text quoted above about what to do if it isn’t. > I guess I'd prefer to keep it defined as CSS3 defines alphavalue, unless there is a substantive difference between the two. > **** > > **2. **Either way, the schema be changed to use the “alpha” > datatype (however we define it). > I've changed the XSD to define opacity by using the ttd:alpha data type. > **** > > ** ** > > Regards,**** > > ** ** > > Mike**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > Michael A DOLAN**** > > Television Broadcast Technology, Inc**** > > PO Box 190, Del Mar, CA 92014 USA**** > > +1-858-882-7497 (m)**** > > ** ** >
Received on Monday, 13 May 2013 00:39:46 UTC