- From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 10:34:31 +0200
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Cc: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, Timed Text Working Group <public-tt@w3.org>
Addressed at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/diff/dffe001fa4c8/ttml-ww-profiles/ttml-ww-profiles.source.html On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: > I mean all of 3.2.1. > > > On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote: >> >> On 01/08/2014 15:46, "Glenn Adams" <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: >> >> Seems a bit wordy, but OK. >> >> >> Yeah I tried to go for accuracy and got verbosity as an added 'feature'. >> >> > It would probably be good to require an IMSC processor to satisfy the >> > generic processor conformance rules of TTML. >> >> You mean bullets 1, 2 and 3 of Section 3.2.1 in TTML 1 SE? I think bullets >> 4 and 5 are already covered. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> >> wrote: >>> >>> As discussed yesterday, I propose the following wording for a >>> non-normative note to be added to section 3. Conformance of IMSC: >>> >>> <-- >>> NOTE >>> The terms Presentation Processor and Transformation Processor are defined >>> by [TTML1] in general terms and more specifically with requirements for >>> conformance with reference to the DFXP Presentation Profile and >>> Transformation Profile. The use of those terms in this document does not >>> imply that conformance to both the profiles defined herein and the relevant >>> DFXP profile is required. It is not considered an error for a processor to >>> be a conformant presentation processor or transformation processor in the >>> context of this document without being a conformant TTML presentation >>> processor or transformation processor. >>> --> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Nigel >>> >>> >> >
Received on Saturday, 2 August 2014 08:35:20 UTC