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

Non-Normative Section 6.4 contains normative keyword #249

Open
andreastai opened this issue Oct 6, 2024 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #256
Open

Non-Normative Section 6.4 contains normative keyword #249

andreastai opened this issue Oct 6, 2024 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #256

Comments

@andreastai
Copy link

Implementations MUST compute attribute values based on the contents of the
document instance before applying those computed values to DAPT data model objects.

This may be derived by TTML2 but it is still not defined as such in TTML2.

@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @andreastai , just to check, is the issue here the use of the normative keyword MUST, or is it that TTML2 does not normatively define the semantics being referenced?

@andreastai
Copy link
Author

It is the use of the keyword MUST. The reference to TTML2 was only mentioned because of the addition

"Some normative provisions relating to this section are defined in [TTML2]."

at the beginning of the section (in case this was the reasoning to use the keyword.

@andreastai andreastai changed the title Non-Normative Section 6.3 contains normative keyword Non-Normative Section 6.4 contains normative keyword Oct 7, 2024
@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

There's a normative reference to this section from §5.2.1:

After attribute value computation, a presentation processor SHOULD ignore unrecognised vocabulary.

so I will propose a fix for this that makes §6.4 normative, and removes the reference to normative provisions from TTML2 at the top which will no longer be needed.

@nigelmegitt nigelmegitt linked a pull request Oct 8, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants