ISSUE-109: Proposal to unify handling of profile conflicts.

inconsistent handling of profile conflicts

Proposal to unify handling of profile conflicts.

State:
CLOSED
Product:
TTML 1.0
Raised by:
Sean Hayes
Opened on:
2009-05-22
Description:
The following language appears in the definition of the profile element:

"If more than one ttp:profile element appears in a TT AF document instance, then all specified profiles apply simultaneously. In such a case, if some feature or some extension is specified by one profile to be required (mandatory) and by another profile to be optional (voluntary), then that feature or extension must be considered to be required (mandatory)."

This is inconsistent (and for no obvious reason) with the case where the same element is multiply defined within a single <profile> element; where the language below applies. This requires two different types of handling in the processor where one would suffice if the handling were unified.

"for each ttp:feature and ttp:extension element descendant of the ttp:profile element, using a post-order traversal, merge the specified feature or extension with the features and extensions of the profile, where merging a feature or extension entails replacing an existing feature or extension specification, if it already exists, or adding a new feature or extension specification, if it does not yet exist in the profile;"

propose to replace the latter language with something to the effect of:

for each ttp:feature and ttp:extension element descendant of the ttp:profile element, using a post-order traversal, merge the specified feature or extension with the features and extensions of the profile, where merging a feature or extension entails adding it if it does not yet exist in the profile; or where it does exist in the profile and one designation denotes it required (mandatory) and the other optional (voluntary), then that feature or extension must be made required (mandatory) in the profile.

(the alternate would be to treat the profile elements in document order would also be acceptable)
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. RE: ISSUE-109 (inconsistent handling of profile conflicts): Proposal to unify handling of profile conflicts. [DFXP 1.0] (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2009-05-28)
  2. Re: ISSUE-109 (inconsistent handling of profile conflicts): Proposal to unify handling of profile conflicts. [DFXP 1.0] (from gadams@xfsi.com on 2009-05-28)
  3. RE: ISSUE-109 (inconsistent handling of profile conflicts): Proposal to unify handling of profile conflicts. [DFXP 1.0] (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2009-05-28)
  4. RE: ISSUE-109 (inconsistent handling of profile conflicts): Proposal to unify handling of profile conflicts. [DFXP 1.0] (from gadams@xfsi.com on 2009-05-26)
  5. ISSUE-109 (inconsistent handling of profile conflicts): Proposal to unify handling of profile conflicts. [DFXP 1.0] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2009-05-22)

Related notes:

no inconsistency since distinct language addresses different intents; see related email (2) below;

Glenn Adams, 27 May 2009, 01:43:17

Display change log ATOM feed


David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, Chairs, Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>, Philippe Le H├ęgaret <plh@w3.org>, Staff Contacts
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: index.php,v 1.325 2014-09-10 21:42:02 ted Exp $