- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 10:25:39 -0600
- To: Michael Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com>
- Cc: TTWG <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+cwe1S09Oyw5cVphB7LwjOER7sgQfhZ-Qx=4Jq68GPqpg@mail.gmail.com>
Could you please explain? What is invalid? On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Michael Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com> wrote: > This condition is an invalid document and thus decoder behavior is > undefined. > > Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: Glenn Adams via GitHub [mailto:sysbot+gh@w3.org] > Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 1:47 PM > To: public-tt@w3.org > Subject: [ttml2] Does tts:backgroundImage affect size of content area? > > skynavga has just created a new issue for > https://github.com/w3c/ttml2: > > == Does tts:backgroundImage affect size of content area? == According to > SMTPE ST2052-1:2013 ยง5.5.6: > > > The min-height and min-width of the area associated with the image > shall be set to the intrinsic height and width of the image source. > > and > > > The presented image shall not be scaled and the XSL background-color > trait shall be visible for any background areas of the ``<div>`` > outside the image, therefore, authors should ensure that the div will > be sized to match the given pre-rendering. > > The effects of these two requirements are that if an image is larger > than the nominal minimum content size of the generated area, then that > minimal content size is to be increased to encompass the intrinsic > image size as required. While if the nominal minimum content size is > already larger than the intrinsic image size, the background color of > the generated area (if not transparent) will be visible outsize the > image, i.e., the image is not scaled in either dimension to fill the > nominal minimum content size in such a case. > > IMSC1, which makes use of the ``smpte:backgroundImage`` extension, > does not specify any details about sizing, other than to say that the > intrinsic image size must correspond to the size of the region into > which its associated generated area(s) are flowed. As such, one may > presume that IMSC1 intends the above language from ST2052 to apply > (Pierre?). > > The problem here is that this behavior is at variance with both XSL-FO > and CSS, where the minimum content size of generated areas associated > with a background image **is not** increased to the intrinsic image > size. In other words, in XSL-FO or CSS, if there is no content in the > element, then no area is generated, or if one is generated, it has > zero for one or both content area dimensions. On the other hand, if > there is content in the element, but its nominal formatted size is > smaller than the intrinsic size of the background image, then some of > the image will be clipped. I am attaching a test file that > demonstrates the CSS behavior below. > > Now, the problem here in TTML2 is how to handle this discrepancy > w.r.t. XSL-FO and CSS introduced by SMPTE-TT and apparently adopted by > IMSC1. One way to handle it would be to require that ``tts:ipd`` and > ``tts:bpd`` be used with TTML2 if one wants such behavior with a > background image (in a like manner to how one is forced to specify > width and height properties in XSL-FO or CSS). Or we could add a > ``tts:{ipdMinimum,bpdMinimum}`` pair in TTML2 to specify instead. Or > we could generalize the values of ``tts:{ipd,bpd}`` to allow > specifying a (minimum, optimum, maximum) tuple. Or we could allow the > minimum values of these properties to be specified with a keyword, say > ``backgroundImageSize``. > > In any case, we have an issue here, so I have added an editorial note > to the section on > (tts:backgroundImage)[ > https://rawgit.com/w3c/ttml2/master/spec/ttml2.html#style-attribute-backgroundImage > ] > in the TTML2 ED. > > Following is the CSS example file: > > [test.html.zip](https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/files/222397/test.html.zip) > > > > Please view or discuss this issue at > https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/157 using your GitHub account > > >
Received on Monday, 18 April 2016 16:26:27 UTC