- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 21:47:37 -0700
On Apr 11, 2010, at 2:59 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:30 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer > <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote: > f>> Is it expected that all of TTML will be required? The proposal > suggests >> >> That is also something that still has to be discussed further. >> Initial >> feedback from browser vendors was that the full TTML spec is too >> complicated and too much to support from the start. Thus, the >> implementation path with the TTML profiles is being suggested. >> >> However, it is as yet unclear if there should be a native parsing >> implementation of TTML implemented in browsers or simply a mapping of >> TTML markup to HTML/CSS/JavaScript. My gut feeling is that the latter >> would be easier, in particular since such a mapping has been started >> already with Philippe's implementation, see >> http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ThisIsCoffee.html . The mapping would need >> to be documented. > > Personally I'm concerned that if we start heading down the TTML path, > browsers are ultimately going to end up forced to implement the whole > thing. Useful parts as well as parts less so. We see this time and > again where if we implement part of a spec we end up forced to > implement the whole thing. I'm especially concerned that TTML presentation is formally defined in terms of XSL-FO, itself an extremely complicated spec that is in many ways at odds with the CSS formatting model in browser engines. I am not at all enthusiastic about implementing a second layout engine just for captions. While some have claimed that it's probably possible to translate TTML presentation requirements to CSS, I don't really buy this without seeing a normative specification for how to do so. Regards, Maciej -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100411/2c2917bd/attachment.htm>
Received on Sunday, 11 April 2010 21:47:37 UTC