fantasai wrote: > > csant wrote: > >> >> On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 11:41:01 +0200, fantasai >> <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >> >>> So, imho, the box model for aural css should be >>> >>> pause-before >>> cue-before >>> cue-padding-before >>> content >>> cue-padding-after >>> cue-after >>> pause-after >>> >>> where cue-padding pads the cue so it doesn't run up against the edge >>> of the content (the same way padding in visual CSS pads the border so >> > >> it doesn't run up against the content). > >> >> Yes, this was my original thought - but I do not particularly like >> 'cue-padding-before' and 'cue-padding-after': it is not clear that >> 'cue-padding-before' actually is the padding after the cue-before... :) > > > How about 'cue-before-padding' and 'cue-after-padding'? > >> I would propose to stick to the convention of labeling this model an > > > 'aural box model'. > > Yeah, I agree with that. :) > > ~fantasai > Perhaps even better "content-aural-padding-before" to reflect it is "before" content, rather than using another "wrapper" to distinguish? Or some other similar scoped naming sceme. /me notes for disclaimer that he is not familiar with Aural UA's other than by reference, nor has he read the SSML spec. ~Justin WoodReceived on Thursday, 5 August 2004 16:12:46 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:13:07 UTC