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

Smooth transitions between ISDs should not be preferred #304

Closed
nigelmegitt opened this issue Dec 24, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

Smooth transitions between ISDs should not be preferred #304

nigelmegitt opened this issue Dec 24, 2017 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

See also w3c/ttml2#485

The note beneath the [associate region] algorithm states:

Where an implementation is able to detect significant similarity between two adjacent synchronic document instances, DOCinterN DOCinterN−1, then it is preferred that the implementation make the transition between presenting the two instances as smooth as possible ...

The use of the term "preferred" is territory-specific and not culturally accepted globally, so it should either be removed or scoped to the places where it is true. For example in the US smooth scrolling is preferred, whereas in the UK jump scrolling is preferred, and those preferences are strong active preferences.

I propose to change the wording to: "..., then the implementation may apply processing to make the transition between presenting the two instances as smooth as possible..." to remove the preference.

I suspect @mikedo could be particularly interested in this, based on my recollection of previous conversations.

@css-meeting-bot
Copy link
Member

The Working Group just discussed Smooth transitions between ISDs should not be preferred ttml1#304, and agreed to the following resolutions:

  • RESOLUTION: Merge the pull request as is
The full IRC log of that discussion <nigel> Topic: Smooth transitions between ISDs should not be preferred ttml1#304
<nigel> github: https://github.com//issues/304
<nigel> Glenn: I'm not going to object to merging the pull request already open for this.
<nigel> .. [adjusts pull request review]
<nigel> RESOLUTION: Merge the pull request as is

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

3 participants