ISSUE-261: signaling document profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements

signaling document profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements

State:
CLOSED
Product:
TTML2
Raised by:
Glenn Adams
Opened on:
2013-07-11
Description:
The profile element and attribute currently signal a feature set that a decoder must implement in order to reasonably present the document. Although it also hints at what features the document instance may include, it does not signal document instance conformance today.

There is currently no mechanism to signal what profile a document instance conforms to (e.g. sdp-us).

It is desirable to add this capability to TTML. However, simply adding this semantic to the existing profile element and attribute overly constrains the existing (decoder) and desired (document) semantics. It is unreasonable to require that the single element and attribute simultaneously signal both. For example, the fact that a document instance conforms to dfxp-full does and should not automatically infer that an sdp-us decoder could not properly present it. That is instance dependent. This situation is aggravated when multiple profiles are involved.

Some means must be defined to separately signal these different semantics. For example, we could create a new element and attribute - <ContentProfile> and contentProfile.
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. {minutes} TTWG Meeting 5/6/2014 (from nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk on 2014-06-05)
  2. RE: {agenda} TTWG Meeting 5/6/2014 (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2014-06-04)
  3. {agenda} TTWG Meeting 5/6/2014 (from nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk on 2014-06-04)
  4. {minutes} TTML Meeting of 24/10/13 (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-10-24)
  5. RE: TTML Agenda for 24/10/13 (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-10-23)
  6. TTML Agenda for 24/10/13 (from nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk on 2013-10-23)
  7. TTML Agenda for 03/10/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-10-03)
  8. Re: TTML Minutes for 25/09/13 (from tmichel@w3.org on 2013-09-27)
  9. RE: TTML Minutes for 25/09/13 (from silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com on 2013-09-27)
  10. RE: TTML Minutes for 25/09/13 (from nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk on 2013-09-26)
  11. TTML Agenda for 25/09/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-09-25)
  12. TTML Agenda for 19/09/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-09-19)
  13. TTML Agenda for 15/08/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-08-15)
  14. Re: TML Agenda for 06/08/13 (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-08-08)
  15. [Minutes] TTWG telecon 08/08/2013 (from tmichel@w3.org on 2013-08-08)
  16. Re: TML Agenda for 06/08/13 (from pal@palemieux.com on 2013-08-08)
  17. TML Agenda for 06/08/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-08-08)
  18. [minutes] Timed Text 20130725 (from plh@w3.org on 2013-07-25)
  19. TTML Agenda for 25/07/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-07-25)
  20. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-17)
  21. RE: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-17)
  22. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-17)
  23. RE: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-17)
  24. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-16)
  25. RE: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-16)
  26. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-16)
  27. RE: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-16)
  28. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-16)
  29. RE: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-16)
  30. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  31. RE: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-15)
  32. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  33. RE: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-15)
  34. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  35. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  36. Re: profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  37. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-15)
  38. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  39. profile definition and resolution [was RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-15)
  40. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-15)
  41. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  42. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-15)
  43. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from tai@irt.de on 2013-07-15)
  44. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-07-12)
  45. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from pal@sandflow.com on 2013-07-12)
  46. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-07-12)
  47. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-12)
  48. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-07-12)
  49. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-12)
  50. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-12)
  51. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from pal@sandflow.com on 2013-07-12)
  52. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from pal@sandflow.com on 2013-07-12)
  53. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-07-12)
  54. RE: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-07-12)
  55. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from pal@sandflow.com on 2013-07-12)
  56. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-07-12)
  57. Re: ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from pal@sandflow.com on 2013-07-12)
  58. ISSUE-261: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements [TTML.next] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-07-11)

Related notes:

Add ttp:contentProfile parameter attribute. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/rev/7e69af3fd4ce

Glenn Adams, 6 Sep 2013, 04:04:42

The ttp:contentProfile element will also, like ttp:profile, reference a profile definition via a profile designator. The same profile definition framework used to express processor profile (i.e., minimum processor support) will be used for content profiles, however, they a content profile definition may make use of additional values for features/extensions, e.g., "prohibited". Further values may be added to support use cases where the profile definition document is used to express a content profile. Furthermore, it may turn out that a single profile definition document can serve as both a content profile and as a processor profile.

Glenn Adams, 6 Sep 2013, 04:09:05

EBU liaison has requested feature to allow document conformance to (zero to many) profiles to be described using short form aliases to allow references to specifications not wholly defined by schemas or feature designators, i.e. where behaviour is described normatively in documentation.

Nigel Megitt, 23 Oct 2013, 14:01:41

[pal]: signaling docoument profile conformance is separate from decoder presentation requirements

24 Oct 2013, 15:31:04

Raised by Mike Dolan
PAL: P1

Philippe Le Hégaret, 24 Oct 2013, 15:32:11

Fixed at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/rev/66236744421e.

Glenn Adams, 24 May 2014, 04:20:01

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 Hégaret <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 1.326 2018/10/13 17:29:51 vivien Exp $