- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:13:54 -0600
- To: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
- Cc: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, Public TTWG List <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+ehh2KN3U=1NsK5_8_kpnGHw9Cu3nJi5CMkkycqy2v9Rg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote: > Nigel, Pierre, > > Thanks for your report on the coverage of the Test suite vs IMSC1 CR. > > I have added in the implementation report [1] the following wording > > ["MSC1 introduces extensions to TTML1, as well as incorporates extensions > specified in ST2052-1 and EBU-TT-D. Tests cover every feature defined in > IMSC1 not already present in TTML1. Refer to the list of extensions added > in IMSC1 in section 6.7, section 6.10, section 7.4, section 8.4 and in > Appendix F. [http://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1/#features-and-extensions"] > > > I have also added links in the table, to the appropriate section of the > IMSC spec, for convinience. > > For this test suite we are mainly covering the SHALL assertions > > like for example: > > - The root container of a Document Instance SHALL be mapped to the related > video object frame according to the following: > - If ittp:aspectRatio is present, the root container SHALL be mapped to a > rectangular area within the related video object such that: > > > Shouldn't we also test the SHALL NOT assertions to test/describe the > behavior ? > these are constraints on content, not on processing; further, there is no defined processing behavior if they are present/used; so i think there is nothing to test > > For example: > > - Text Profile Constraints > #image SHALL NOT be used. > > - Image Profile Constraints > smpte:backgroundImageHorizontal and smpte:backgroundImageVertical SHALL > NOT be used. > smpte:image SHALL NOT be used. > > > ittp:aspectRatio SHALL NOT be present if tts:extent is present. > > > [1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/IMSC1_Implementation_Report# > Introduction > Thierry. > > > > > > > > > On 12/03/2015 02:13, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux wrote: > >> Hi Nigel, >> >> Thanks for the review. >> >> I have added a test at [1] as recommended in row #1 of the report. >> >> I propose we discuss the other two test during our next call. >> >> Best, >> >> -- Pierre >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TimedText/IMSC1_Implementation_Report#Tests >> >> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> Apologies for only being able to schedule this work so close to the >>> deadline, but I've at last managed to do a pass through IMSC 1 looking >>> for >>> normative statements that affect processors, and reconcile this against >>> the test suite that we have, as discussed in telcons recently. >>> >>> I think I've found some normative statements on processor behaviour for >>> which tests are absent or incomplete. I attach a table showing this >>> analysis. Just a reminder: the statements or features that need to be >>> tested are those that are new to IMSC 1 relative to TTML1SE. >>> >>> In the case of the requirements from ยง6.6 concerning ttp:frameRate and >>> ttp:frameRateMultiplier, I am unsure what the test should be because it >>> is >>> not clear exactly what the spec is requiring the processor to do: is it >>> saying that the related video object must be advanced at the stated >>> ttp:frameRate regardless of how it was encoded or decoded or is it saying >>> that if they do not match already then the processor should display >>> nothing, for example? >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Nigel >>> >>> -- >>> Nigel Megitt >>> Lead Technologist, BBC Technology >>> Telephone: +44 (0)3030807996 >>> BC4 A3 Broadcast Centre, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TP >>> >>> >>> >> >
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2015 12:14:41 UTC