Re: Objections to TPAC resolutions on IMSC1.1

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 6:49 PM, David Singer <singer@mac.com> wrote:

> Thank you for confirming both that this is existing practice and that we
> need to stop diverging from the web community.
>

We can't diverge from the web community when the web community has no
solution. And besides that, I think you don't want to go down this
rat-hole, otherwise, I might have to raise the spectacle of VTT vs TTML.
Talk about divergence.


>
> Dave Singer (iPhone)
>
> On Nov 27, 2017, at 17:37, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 5:18 PM, David Singer <singer@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 27, 2017, at 10:45 , Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Given that such an addition to CSS would require years to obtain in a
>> REC, it is entirely impractical to use this rationale with TTML2 (and
>> probably TTML3).
>> >
>>
>> I read this, perhaps wrongly (and if so, please correct me) that the
>> timed text group can, and should, invent styling mechanisms that are
>> different from, or absent from, CSS, because they can move faster.  If this
>> is what you mean, I disagree in almost every respect, and in particular, if
>> something is needed for styling text in general, it belongs in CSS.  *Only*
>> if the styling is caption-specific and irrelevant in all other contexts,
>> should the captioning language invent new styling.
>>
>
> Since this (invent styling mechanisms as needed) is the status quo for
> this group and for TTML in particular, what you suggest is a departure from
> existing practice, and not the other way around.
>
>
>>
>> David Singer
>>
>> singer@mac.com
>>
>>
>