- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 13:13:46 -0600
- To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
- Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@telecom-paristech.fr>, TTWG <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+faDuAzQdYkp1FAJk1z8agtv6PNQECnrRbMHidGDxkSrw@mail.gmail.com>
we will not use this to declare document conformance On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > I don't believe that would help. The choice of interpretation as AND or OR > depends on whether you're describing a document's conformance or a set of > processors which could handle the document. The likelihood is that the > parameter will be misinterpreted whichever we choose, and regardless of how > clearly we specify the meaning. > > I suggest we use a symbol associated with neither AND not OR to highlight > to anyone about to make an incorrect assumption that they should look up > what it means and not just guess. > > Perhaps # would work as a two-way combinatorial operator? > > So when used to express conformance with multiple specifications > stpp.ttml.abc#def means "conforms to both/all" (the AND relationship) but > when used to offer a choice of processors it means "any of these processors > can handle" (the OR relationship). > > Any further decisions about the document or processing choice are > delegated to the implementation and may require parsing a document. > > Nigel > > > On 14 May 2014, at 18:52, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > >> > >> codecs=“stpp.ttml.st10+tt1p” > >> > >> or something similar, expressing one TTML track for which either an > st10 processor or a tt1p processor are acceptable. > >> > >> ok; but does anyone but me wonder if '+' is the best operator? in my > mind it is more associated with AND than OR; could we use '|' instead? > > > > My read of the RFCs is that we need to avoid period, comma, and > double-quote, so vertical bar should be fine. > > > > > > David Singer > > Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc. > > > > > > > ----------------------------- > http://www.bbc.co.uk > This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and > may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless > specifically stated. > If you have received it in > error, please delete it from your system. > Do not use, copy or disclose the > information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender > immediately. > Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails > sent or received. > Further communication will signify your consent to > this. > -----------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2014 19:14:16 UTC