Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

is tts:textShadow required? #13

Closed
palemieux opened this issue Nov 20, 2017 · 9 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@palemieux
Copy link
Contributor

commented Nov 20, 2017

@nigelmegitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Nov 20, 2017

Thanks, I was just about to open the very same issue! The question in summary is: if tts:textOutline were supported, would tts:textShadow support still be required to support some regulatory requirement?

Mentioning @mikedo who was asked about this in the (now merged) pull request, to alert him to the fact that the discussion has moved.

@nigelmegitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Nov 20, 2017

@palemieux palemieux added the agenda label Dec 6, 2017

@palemieux

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jan 15, 2018

Propose keeping tts:textShadow given its potential mapping to 708 and direct mapping to CSS.

@palemieux palemieux removed the agenda label Jan 15, 2018

@nigelmegitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jan 16, 2018

Then how will you resolve both textOutline and textShadow being present at the same time?

@palemieux

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jan 16, 2018

Then how will you resolve both textOutline and textShadow being present at the same time?

They are different effects: the first grows the outline of each glyph, while the second creates multiple copies of the glyph.

@palemieux

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jan 16, 2018

P.S.: I do not know why anyone would use both simultaneously, but their effects can be cumulated, e.g. first draw outline and then draw shadow.

@mikedo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jan 16, 2018

textShadow meets the one CTA 708 property (Edge Type) that can't be done today in TTML. From a 708 perspective we don't need both, certainly not concurrently. So, if we are going to remove/deprecate one, it should be textOutline.

@palemieux

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jan 16, 2018

So, if we are going to remove/deprecate one, it should be textOutline.

textOutline is the effect used for home video content, e.g. on Blu Ray.

... so it sounds like we need both until further notice.

@palemieux palemieux added agenda and removed agenda labels Jan 17, 2018

@css-meeting-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jan 18, 2018

The Working Group just discussed is tts:textShadow required? imsc-vnext-reqs#13, and agreed to the following resolutions:

  • RESOLUTION: textShadow is required, no spec change needed.
The full IRC log of that discussion <nigel> Topic: is tts:textShadow required? imsc-vnext-reqs#13
<nigel> github: https://github.com//issues/13
<nigel> Pierre: It sounds like textShadow and textOutline have different sweet spots and don't conflict.
<nigel> .. textShadow is supported by CSS so my plan is to support both in IMSC 1.1.
<nigel> Nigel: It's a small point, but do we need to point out in the spec in an informative note why both are needed?
<nigel> Pierre: Good examples as in TTML2 will show the difference. They're really different effects.
<nigel> Cyril: I definitely don't want to remove textOutline because we're using it.
<nigel> Pierre: I've also heard the same for textShadow.
<nigel> RESOLUTION: textShadow is required, no spec change needed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.