ISSUE-264: What XML entities are valid in TTML canonical syntax

Entity resolution

What XML entities are valid in TTML canonical syntax

State:

CLOSED

Product:

Raised by:

Sean Hayes

Opened on:

2013-07-19

Description:

We need to be clear which entities we expect to work in a TTML concrete XML document beyond the minimal set defined in the XML specification.

In particular many documents I'm seeing contain entities like   from HTML, which are not defined to work, but its also not explicitly defined anywhere that they don't work (since TTML is defined in terms of an infoset which would presumably be after entity processing).

We should consider whether we want to define a similar set for HTML compatibility in the canonical syntax. At the very least we need to clearly indicate somewhere what the expectation is.

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. TTML Agenda for 19/09/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-09-19)
2. No Meeting today 12-09-13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-09-12)
3. Minutes for 05/09/13 (from nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk on 2013-09-05)
4. Agenda for 05/09/13 (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-09-04)
5. RE: TTML Agenda for 29/08/13 (from mdolan@newtbt.com on 2013-08-28)
6. TTML Agenda for 29/08/13 (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-08-28)
7. Re: TML Agenda for 06/08/13 (from glenn@skynav.com on 2013-08-08)
8. [Minutes] TTWG telecon 08/08/2013 (from tmichel@w3.org on 2013-08-08)
9. Re: TML Agenda for 06/08/13 (from pal@palemieux.com on 2013-08-08)
10. TML Agenda for 06/08/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-08-08)
11. [minutes] Timed Text 20130725 (from plh@w3.org on 2013-07-25)
12. TTML Agenda for 25/07/13 (from Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com on 2013-07-25)
13. ISSUE-264 (Entity resolution): What XML entities are valid in TTML canonical syntax (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-07-19)

Related notes:

Display change log