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

Add note to tts:position that negative offsets are not allowed #367

Closed
palemieux opened this issue Apr 5, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

Add note to tts:position that negative offsets are not allowed #367

palemieux opened this issue Apr 5, 2018 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@palemieux
Copy link
Contributor

... since regions must be within the root container region

@palemieux palemieux added this to the imsc1.1 PR milestone Apr 5, 2018
@palemieux palemieux self-assigned this Apr 5, 2018
@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

Why call out this particular possible way to create regions that are positioned partly outside the root container region? There are other permutations too, such as specifying an extent that is wider or taller than 100%, which we do not call out with a note.

I don't really mind an informative note, just a really tiny bit concerned that it might be misread as an enumeration of all the things that are prohibited, rather than only a single example.

@palemieux
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't really mind an informative note, just a really tiny bit concerned that it might be misread as an
enumeration of all the things that are prohibited, rather than only a single example.

Yes, I am not excited by all these notes. It was intended to match the third note at https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1.0.1/#ittp-activeArea.

@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

I think it's the other way around though, in that the third note you reference just describes a result of the normative requirement, whereas adding a note about a particular set of values that is prohibited by the normative requirement, without being exhaustive, feels like a step too far for me.

Is this an external request? If it's wide review feedback I would like to know more about the reason for it. Otherwise I would say take no action and close this issue. Happy to hear other views of course.

@palemieux
Copy link
Contributor Author

I created this issue on my own, and am happy to close it if no one else sees value in the proposed note.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants