Some general remarks about TimedText DFXP

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Some general remarks about TimedText DFXP

Samuel CRUZ-LARA
Dear all,

Enclosed you will find a PDF document containing some general remarks about
TimedText DFXP.

Best regards,

Samuel Cruz-Lara
LORIA / INRIA Lorraine
[hidden email]


Some general remarks about Timed Text.pdf (60K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Some general remarks about TimedText DFXP

Glenn Adams

Samuel,

Thank you for considering the DFXP formulation of the Timed Text
Authoring Format. Perhaps some background will be useful for better
understanding:

1. the requirement for parallel language representations of a single
logical document in the context of a single document instance was
discussed and included in TTAF1.0 requirements (see R201); explicit
support for this was ruled out in DFXP, which is intended to satisfy a
high priority subset of requirements that relate to interchange of
legacy content; the conclusion of the WG was that it would be better to
use multiple DFXP document instances to represent multiple language
representations; it remains feasible to define a more complete profile
of TTAF1.0 in the future, such as the AFXP (Authoring Format Exchange
Profile) that was considered in earlier drafts, but, at this time, has
taken a back seat due to insufficient member support;

2. no discussion occurred on the issue of how to explicitly synchronize
content between multiple language instances; this potential requirement
(which may be implied in your work) was not submitted for WG
consideration;

3. requirement R203, regarding natural language association granularity,
was intended to support only course grained linguistic attribution, and,
indeed, xml:lang satisfied this basic requirement; it remains possible
for a user of DFXP to make use of the ttm:role attribute while using
extension tokens (i.e., "x-*") to denote application specific bindings;

4. the TTWG did perform a cursory review of the functionality defined by
TEI (text encoding initiative) that could have formed the basis for
additional requirements or solutions, however, no consensus was reached
on adding any of its functionality;

The TTWG remains open to you (and others) bringing new requirements to
the group for consideration; however, at this juncture, it is probably
safe to say that DFXP itself is closed for the purpose of considering
new requirements unless their absence negatively impacts the basic goals
of DFXP.

Regards,
Glenn Adams
Chair TTWG

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Samuel CRUZ-LARA
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 2:18 AM
To: [hidden email]
Cc: Thierry MICHEL
Subject: Some general remarks about TimedText DFXP

Dear all,

Enclosed you will find a PDF document containing some general remarks
about
TimedText DFXP.

Best regards,

Samuel Cruz-Lara
LORIA / INRIA Lorraine
[hidden email]