W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > January 2015

Re: ISSUE-366 (condition vs xml:id): xml:id uniqueness needs to be broken for some uses of condition [TTML2]

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 08:24:56 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+dMufOPMTYyQrs3XoKuqp+15P9B_FJsxdu=kUL0jn1fLg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Cc: Timed Text Working Group <public-tt@w3.org>
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
wrote:

>  Ah, thanks Glenn, that solution didn't occur to me. It would be worth
> clarifying  in the spec that semantic exclusion applies also to references
> to excluded elements, or equivalently that referenced elements that are
> semantically excluded evaluate to 'null' and can be pruned. At present
> there's nothing in the spec that defines the behaviour in the scenario in
> which an element references another that has been semantically excluded.
>

I can add some informative text on this, but these normative semantics
currently fall out naturally in step 2 of [1].

[1]
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/tip/ttml2/spec/ttml2.html#semantics-style-resolution-processing-sss


> For example either as a change to the condition section or to places where
> references might be made, e.g. ยง10.2.1 style.
>
>  Presumably the same arises when a src attribute is a fragment identifier
> that points to a semantically excluded data element.
>

Could you elaborate this scenario? I can see how a <source> child of <data>
would not resolve to a resource if @condition were false, but not sure what
you have in mind about @src attribute, since one can only have one @src
attribute and it only takes one URI.


>
>
>  From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> Date: Friday, 16 January 2015 14:18
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Timed Text Working Group Issue Tracker <
> sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> ISSUE-366 (condition vs xml:id): xml:id uniqueness needs to be broken for
>> some uses of condition [TTML2]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/366
>>
>> Raised by: Nigel Megitt
>> On product: TTML2
>>
>> Consider the use case in which an author wishes to permit the viewer of a
>> TTML2 document to select from one of a number of style choices, either
>> depending on a parameter or a media query, for example choices that vary
>> tts:fontSize and tts:extent to accommodate 'normal size font', 'large size
>> font' and 'small size font' options.
>>
>>
>> The condition attribute can only be used to omit an element from semantic
>> processing, not to change its behaviour. One might imagine that the
>> following is a way to proceed:
>>
>> ...
>> <layout>
>> <region xml:id="r1" condition="parameter(text_size)=='large size font'"
>> tts:extent="95vw 30vh" .../>
>> <region xml:id="r1" condition="parameter(text_size)=='normal size font'"
>> tts:extent="80vw 20vh" .../>
>> <region xml:id="r1" condition="parameter(text_size)=='small size font'"
>> tts:extent="60vw 15vh" .../>
>> </layout>
>> <styling>
>> <style xml:id="sFontSize" condition="parameter(text_size)=='large size
>> font'" tts:fontSize="15vh"/>
>> <style xml:id="sFontSize" condition="parameter(text_size)=='normal size
>> font'" tts:fontSize="10vh"/>
>> <style xml:id="sFontSize" condition="parameter(text_size)=='small size
>> font'" tts:fontSize="7.5vh"/>
>> <style xml:id="sDefaultFont" style="sFontSize"
>> tts:fontFamily="myFontFamily"/>
>> </styling>
>>
>> ...
>>
>> <body>
>> <div region="r1" style="sDefaultFont">
>> ...
>> </div>
>> </body>
>>
>
>  Condition is not intended to be used like #ifdef | #ifndef, i.e., as a
> syntactic inclusion/exclusion system, but as semantic inclusion/exclusion
> only. There are perfectly good alternatives to the above that do not
> require duplicating ids, such as:
>
>  <styling>
> <style xml:id="s0" tts:fontFamily="myFontFamily"/>
> <style xml:id="s1" condition="parameter(text_size)=='large size font'"
> tts:fontSize="15vh" tts:extent="95vw 30vh"/>
> <style xml:id="s2" condition="parameter(text_size)=='normal size font'"
> tts:fontSize="10vh" tts:extent="80vw 20vh"/>
> <style xml:id="s3" condition="parameter(text_size)=='small size font'"
> tts:fontSize="7.5vh" tts:extent="60vw 15vh"/>
> </styling>
>
>  <layout>
> <region xml:id="r1" style="s0 s1 s2 s3"/>
> </layout>
>
>
>
>> However this construct, which requires use of xml:id for style and region
>> reference, breaks xml:id uniqueness rules, resulting in invalid documents.
>> What options are there for achieving this use case? I can see:
>>
>> a) repeating all the content in the document with different style and
>> region references and specifying condition only on the content,
>>
>> b) basing everything on the initial element and making that conditional
>> (since nothing needs to refer to initial by xml:id), and specifying all
>> regions inline - unfortunately this may be very verbose in terms of
>> repeating regions on many content elements, but it could work for cases
>> where there are only a few regions and they can be associated with body or
>> div elements.
>>
>> Neither of these two options is particularly attractive - a) is highly
>> repetitious and offers no advantage over the provision of multiple
>> documents with any associated costs for asset management and distribution
>> there. b) is limited in basing style on initial so it is a 'one chance'
>> condition, and it is potentially repetitious in region definition.
>>
>>
>> By the way, there are at least three audience groups for which this use
>> case exists: 1) Those who have reading difficulties with normal size text;
>> 2) users of different devices, where it has been established that text
>> needs to be rendered at different sizes on large screen televisions from
>> smartphones for example; 3) those who just want to be able to customise the
>> display.
>>
>>
>> It would be great if the condition construct could be used to allow some
>> predefined viewing options to be authored into the document, i.e. in a
>> controlled way by the document author. I can't see how this can be achieved
>> at present though.
>>
>>
>> What solution choices are there? Perhaps the easiest is to redefine the
>> condition construct so that it also includes an 'if then else if' syntax in
>> which attributes can be defined, so you might end up with, for example:
>>
>> <region xml:id="r1" condition="if parameter(text_size)=='large size font'
>> then (tts:extent='95vw 30vh' elseif parameter(text_size)='normal size font'
>> then (tts:extent='80vw 20vh') elseif parameter(text_size)='small size font'
>> then (tts:extent='60vw 15vh') else (tts:extent='80vw 20vh')"/>
>>
>> Then xml:id rules are not broken and region r1 can be referenced safely
>> with the attribute evaluation only being conditional. I'd advocate
>> retaining the ability to specify a condition that can be used to exclude
>> the entire element from semantic processing, as now.
>>
>>
>> Another solution to this problem might be to define some preprocessing
>> using XPath to select specific elements and/or attributes and set values on
>> the basis of the same condition functions that have already been specified,
>> i.e. parameter, media, supports. Something like:
>>
>> <tt:tt [parameters etc]>
>> <preprocess>
>>    <rule condition="parameter(text_size)=='large size text'"
>> path="//region[@xml:id='r1']">
>>       <attributes tts:extent="95vw 30vh">
>>    </rule>
>> </preprocess>
>> <head>
>>    <layout><region xml:id="r1"/></layout>
>> ...
>>
>> It would be an error for a path attribute to refer to anywhere except
>> <head> or <body> or their descendants.
>>
>> This option would also have the incidental effect that it would provide
>> similar functionality to declarative styling. All the rules would be
>> executed in document order prior to processing the <head>. Preprocessing
>> could of course also be performed externally to the document before
>> processing, if a 'user style' is desirable (as is the case for any XML
>> document) .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Friday, 16 January 2015 15:25:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:20 UTC