- From: HIYAMA Masayuki <hiyama@glocom.ac.jp>
- Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 10:08:17 +0900
- To: Henning Timcke <henning.timcke@werft22.com>
- Cc: Philipp Hoschka <ph@w3.org>, WWW SMIL ML <www-smil@w3.org>
Hi Henning, I cannot give responsible answers, these are merely my personal opinions. On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:12:56 +0200 Henning Timcke <henning.timcke@werft22.com> wrote: > From your point of view, who should take care of your considerations ? To incorporate Philipp's idea into XML spec, some group or person must propose it to the XML Syntax WG. I don't know who should do that. SYMM WG or Philipp? If the WG accept the proposal, they will discuss about it, and finally it goes through (or is killed). > And: how much additional work has to be done to meet your expectations ? The notion of SMIL validity is more than XML validity. To express the correct SMIL constraints, we should have more syntactical facilities -- context sensitive content model (e.g. <switch>) is needed as I mentioned, data-typing of attribute value (e.g. "begin" as a clock value) is also required. I believe the XML Schema WG will work out the issues. By when? ... I cannot forecast. Thank you, -- HIYAMA Masayuki <hiyama@glocom.ac.jp>
Received on Monday, 3 May 1999 20:46:42 UTC