Re: [IMSC] Thoughts re: issue-312 -- itts:forcedDisplay

On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 11:14 PM, John Birch <John.Birch@screensystems.tv>
wrote:

> Whilst it may be less problematic for IMSC to diverge from TTML1 I do have
> more problems with it not being a subset of TTML2. My preference would be
> for a solution that is compatible.
>
> On the forcedDisplay point I do believe that this represents a content
> classification rather than a stylistic attribution... Albeit poorly named.
> I.e. Forced subtitles are content that is different to 'normal'
> subtitles... As Pierre has illustrated, they are often used for
> translations of on-screen texts, or for translations of invented languages
> (e.g. Klingon or Navi). They are a sub classification of subtitle. I am
> however struggling to think of a better term than 'forced subtitles' as
> other alternatives are narrower in scope.
>
> Consequently I suggest that these are handled as a content categorisation
> that invokes a specific style. Possibly a new style attribute value is
> needed: visibility = 'forced'.
>

>From the examples I've seen so far, this is a content selection (as in
active or not active) issue rather than a style (visibility) issue. That
is, I haven't seen any examples where it should map to tts:visible as
opposed to tts:display.

I think we should not disconnect this issue from that of how to treat
content tagged with different languages. Furthermore, we could use the
@condition approach to dynamically select different region extent/origin
based on media device features.


>
> Best regards,
> John
>
>
> John Birch | Strategic Partnerships Manager | Screen
> Main Line : +44 1473 831700 | Ext : 2208 | Direct Dial : +44 1473 834532
> Mobile : +44 7919 558380 | Fax : +44 1473 830078
> John.Birch@screensystems.tv | www.screensystems.tv |
> https://twitter.com/screensystems
>
> Visit us at
> Broadcast Asia, Marina Bay Sands, Singapore 17-20 June, Stand 5E4-01
>
> P Before printing, think about the environment----- Original Message -----
> From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux [mailto:pal@sandflow.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 04:55 AM
> To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
> Cc: public-tt@w3.org <public-tt@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: [IMSC] Thoughts re: issue-312 -- itts:forcedDisplay
>
> > If you want to define it in IMSC1 as a style attribute that will map to
> a future conditional
> > style construct in TTML2, then that is fine, but there is no guarantee
> we will directly support
> > that attribute in TTML2 (as opposed to requiring that the more general
> mechanism be used). As it is,
> > IMSC1 is likely not going to be a strict subset of either TTML1 or TTML2.
>
> Sounds like a reasonable approach.
>
> Best,
>
> -- Pierre
>
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
> > Do you have a real world example of where conditional content couldn't
> > handle it? In any case, I think we can define a conditional styling
> > mechanism as well as conditional content, and then author can choose the
> one
> > that makes sense.
> >
> > If you want to define it in IMSC1 as a style attribute that will map to a
> > future conditional style construct in TTML2, then that is fine, but
> there is
> > no guarantee we will directly support that attribute in TTML2 (as
> opposed to
> > requiring that the more general mechanism be used). As it is, IMSC1 is
> > likely not going to be a strict subset of either TTML1 or TTML2.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:42 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <
> pal@sandflow.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > In this example, the conditional content would suffice, since there
> >> > is no layout interaction between the two regions.
> >>
> >> Perhaps, but this cannot be guaranteed to be always the case.
> >>
> >> -- Pierre
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
> >> > In this example, the conditional content would suffice, since there is
> >> > no
> >> > layout interaction between the two regions.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
> >> > <pal@sandflow.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Glenn,
> >> >>
> >> >> Attached is an example inspired from an opening shot from The Muppets
> >> >> (2011) Blu-Ray.
> >> >>
> >> >> The forced subtitle is the translation of the "High School" sign. It
> >> >> appears when French is selected as the language, even if the user has
> >> >> not explicitly selected French subtitles, i.e. when 'forced mode' is
> >> >> true.
> >> >>
> >> >> The translation of the voiceover is not labeled 'forced', and thus
> >> >> shows up only when French subtitles are selected, i.e. 'forced mode'
> >> >> is false.
> >> >>
> >> >> Best,
> >> >>
> >> >> -- Pierre
> >> >>
> >> >> P.S.: in UVVU, 'forced mode'=='true' is called "Alternate Subtitling
> >> >> Presentation Mode" and 'forced mode'=='false' is called "Primary
> >> >> Subtitling Presentation Mode".
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> > Could you point at or construct a real world example, i.e., images
> of
> >> >> > what a
> >> >> > mixture of forced and non-forced content looks like depending on
> >> >> > whether
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > forced display parameter is true or false?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
> >> >> > <pal@sandflow.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Hi Glenn,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > why would one want it to occupy layout space if not selected?
> >> >> >> > that doesn't make any sense;
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The forced content would have been positioned with the non-forced
> >> >> >> content present. Simply removing the non-forced content from flow
> >> >> >> would potentially change the rendered position of the forced
> >> >> >> content.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I will confirm this.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Best,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> -- Pierre
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
> >> >> >> > <pal@sandflow.com>
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Hi Glenn,
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Thanks for these initial thoughts.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > 3. evaluating this sub-tree in a postorder traversal, prune
> >> >> >> >> > elements
> >> >> >> >> > if they are not a content element, if they have a condition
> >> >> >> >> > attribute
> >> >> >> >> > that evaluates to false,
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Forced" does not remove the content element from layout and
> >> >> >> >> flow,
> >> >> >> >> but
> >> >> >> >> instead
> >> >> >> >> effectively sets the visibility to zero, like
> >> >> >> >> tts:visibility="hidden".
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > it should; why would one want it to occupy layout space if not
> >> >> >> > selected?
> >> >> >> > that doesn't make any sense;
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > i don't see how to handle conditional content and conditional
> >> >> >> > visibility; i
> >> >> >> > think the best you will get is the former
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Best,
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> -- Pierre
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com
> >
> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
> >> >> >> >> > <pal@sandflow.com>
> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> > What do you mean by "application" in this context?
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> The entity that is instructing the presentation processor to
> >> >> >> >> >> render
> >> >> >> >> >> the IMSC document.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> > I also don't know what parameter means in this context,
> >> >> >> >> >> > e.g., what does it mean vis-a-vis a TTML parameter, i.e.,
> >> >> >> >> >> > an attribute expressing a TTML parameter.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> It is not a TTML parameter, as in a ttp:*, but instead a
> state
> >> >> >> >> >> variable passed to the presentation processor instructing it
> >> >> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> >> >> render
> >> >> >> >> >> or not non-forced content, like a function argument in a
> >> >> >> >> >> procedural
> >> >> >> >> >> language.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> > I am opposed to a one-off solution to a special case of
> the
> >> >> >> >> >> > conditional
> >> >> >> >> >> >  content problem. And the forcedDisplay feature is exactly
> >> >> >> >> >> > such
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > special case.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Can you think of a generic solution that would reduce to a
> >> >> >> >> >> single
> >> >> >> >> >> attribute controlling the rendering of forced content? If
> so,
> >> >> >> >> >> we
> >> >> >> >> >> could
> >> >> >> >> >> consider using it in IMSC.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > I haven't given it much thought, but if we were to introduce
> as
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > general
> >> >> >> >> > mechanism a new element type:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > <tt:switch condition="expression">
> >> >> >> >> > ... content elements ...
> >> >> >> >> > </tt:switch>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > then we could also, or as an alternative, introduce an
> >> >> >> >> > attribute
> >> >> >> >> > @condition
> >> >> >> >> > on content element vocabulary, e.g.,
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > <div condition="expression"/>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > where expression uses a simple expression language such as
> >> >> >> >> > media
> >> >> >> >> > queries
> >> >> >> >> > level 4 [1] or a derivative.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/mediaqueries4/
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > For example,
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > <p condition="(forced)"/>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > <p condition="not (forced)"/>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > <p condition="(locale: en)"/>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > <p condition="not (locale: en)"/>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > <p condition="(forced) or not (locale: en)"/>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > ...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Where the semantics of @condition is essentially changing
> step
> >> >> >> >> > 3
> >> >> >> >> > of
> >> >> >> >> > 9.3.3
> >> >> >> >> > [construct intermediate document] to read essentially as
> >> >> >> >> > follows:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > 3. evaluating this sub-tree in a postorder traversal, prune
> >> >> >> >> > elements
> >> >> >> >> > if
> >> >> >> >> > they
> >> >> >> >> > are not a content element, if they have a condition attribute
> >> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> > evaluates
> >> >> >> >> > to false, if they are temporally inactive, if they are empty,
> >> >> >> >> > or
> >> >> >> >> > if
> >> >> >> >> > they
> >> >> >> >> > aren't associated with region R according to the [associate
> >> >> >> >> > region]
> >> >> >> >> > procedure;
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> -- Pierre
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Glenn Adams
> >> >> >> >> >> <glenn@skynav.com>
> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
> >> >> >> >> >> > <pal@sandflow.com>
> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi Glenn,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks for the feedback.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > no, [forcedDisplayModeParameter] should not be a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > parameter,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > which
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > it would go into some
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > parameter namespace, but should be a metadata
> attribute,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ittm:forcedDisplay
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> forcedDisplayModeParameter != itts:forcedDisplay.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> forcedDisplayModeParameter would be a parameter passed by
> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> application to the processor, not a parameter within the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> document.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > What do you mean by "application" in this context? I also
> >> >> >> >> >> > don't
> >> >> >> >> >> > know
> >> >> >> >> >> > what
> >> >> >> >> >> > parameter means in this context, e.g., what does it mean
> >> >> >> >> >> > vis-a-vis
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > TTML
> >> >> >> >> >> > parameter, i.e., an attribute expressing a TTML parameter.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > in other words, TTML will remain silent on any
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > presentation
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > semantics
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > of
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > such an attribute;
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> How would interoperability be achieved?
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > By defining a standard mechanism for expressing
> conditional
> >> >> >> >> >> > content
> >> >> >> >> >> > contingent on external processor state, e.g., selected
> >> >> >> >> >> > language,
> >> >> >> >> >> > whether
> >> >> >> >> >> > display of some content is forced or not, etc.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > I am opposed to a one-off solution to a special case of
> the
> >> >> >> >> >> > conditional
> >> >> >> >> >> > content problem. And the forcedDisplay feature is exactly
> >> >> >> >> >> > such
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > special
> >> >> >> >> >> > case.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- Pierre
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Glenn Adams
> >> >> >> >> >> >> <glenn@skynav.com>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > <pal@sandflow.com>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> During our last call, I noted two concerns with the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> itts:forcedDisplay
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> feature as currently drafted.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> (a) the semantics of the itts:forcedDisplay feature
> are
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> not
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> sufficiently specified
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> (b) the representation of itts:forcedDisplay as an
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> attribute
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> not
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> desirable
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > that should read as a style attribute
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> To address (a), below is proposed prose:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> """
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The presentation processor SHALL accept an optional
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> boolean
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> parameter
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> called forcedDisplayModeParameter, whose value may be
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> set
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> by
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> application. If not set, the value of
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> forcedDisplayModeParameter
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> shall
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> be assumed to be equal to "false".
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > no, it should not be a parameter, in which it would go
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > into
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > some
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > parameter
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > namespace, but should be a metadata attribute,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ittm:forcedDisplay
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > i'm not sure why you wish to lengthen the name
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > unnecessarily
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> If the value of forcedDisplayModeParameter is "true",
> a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> content
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> element with a itts:forcedDisplay computed value of
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "false"
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> shall
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> be
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> assumed to have a tts:visibility computed value equal
> to
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "hidden",
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> even if tts:visibility is otherwise set to "true".
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> """
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > now, this is again placing style/presentation semantics
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > this
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > metadata
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > attribute, which is inapropriate
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The idea is to essentially ignore the
> itts:forcedDisplay
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> attribute
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> unless otherwise specifically requested by the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> application.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > i'm not sure what "requested by the application" means
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > here
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> This also
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> clarifies that itts:forcedDisplay has "no effect on
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> content
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> layout
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> or
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> composition, but merely determines whether composed
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> content
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> visible
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> or not."
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > if that is the purpose, then the tts:visibility
> property
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > should
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > used
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > therefore there is no need for a new forcedDisplay
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > attribute
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> As next step, I plan to create examples.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Re: (b), I am not comfortable rejecting a solution
> that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> users
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> have
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> devised and implemented based on actual use cases and
> in
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> absence
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> of specific guidance and/or prohibition in TTML 1.0.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > if those users expect that the TTWG would simply adopt
> a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > solution
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > as
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > fait
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > accompli, then they are naive; an appropriate process
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > would
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > have
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > been
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > bring use cases and requirements to the TTWG first, not
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > bring a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > solution
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > as
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > a given
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > at this point, I think the best that can be hoped for
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > IMSC
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > is
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > define
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > metadata attribute ittm:forcedDisplay which is
> described
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > as
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > hint
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > associated content is intended to be selected as a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > candidate
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > for
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > display
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > by
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > a higher level protocol (outside the scope of formally
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > defined
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > TTML
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > processing); in other words, TTML will remain silent on
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > any
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > presentation
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > semantics of such an attribute;
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > on the other hand, we may choose in TTML2 to define a
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > conditional
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > content
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > mechanism similar to the SMIL or SVG switch element,
> that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > could
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > address
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > this
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > use case
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Best,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- Pierre
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
> you are not the intended recipient you must not use, copy, disclose or take
> any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have
> received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by
> reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
> Screen Subtitling Systems Ltd. Registered in England No. 2596832.
> Registered Office: The Old Rectory, Claydon Church Lane, Claydon, Ipswich,
> Suffolk, IP6 0EQ
>