[whatwg] Timed tracks: feedback compendium

[Craig S. Kiessling]

Can someone please let me know how to unsubscribe? Many thanks.

Sincerely,

Craig S. Kiessling
www.PathsAtlanta.org <http://www.pathsatlanta.org> - Martial Arts & More
www.CSKnet.net <http://www.csknet.net> - SEO & More
/www.AtlantaMahjong.com <http://www.atlantamahjong.com> - The Mahjong Source
in Atlanta

Connect with Me
http://www.csknet.net/Contact/





On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp at opera.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Jan 2011 16:57:50 +0100, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj at opera.com>
> wrote:
>
>  To use a different style for the cues that are sung together, so that
>>>> you know when it's your turn to sing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's not clear whether multiple voices is really necessary. Can't you
>>> just
>>> do (using the new syntax):
>>>
>>>  00:01.000 --> 00:02.000
>>>  <v Bob> Speaker 1
>>> 00:03.000 --> 00:04.000
>>>  <v Jim> Speaker 2
>>> 00:05.000 --> 00:06.000
>>>  <v Bob and Jim> Speaker 1+2
>>>
>>> ...where "Bob and Jim" is a third name?
>>>
>>
>> Sure, one could, but the new syntax/parsing also allows <v Bob><v Jim>
>> Speaker 1+2, which is what I requested.
>>
>> Using this syntax, I would expect some confusion when you omit the closing
>> </v>, when it's *not* a cue spoken by two voices at the same time, such as:
>>
>> <v Jim>- Boo!
>> <v Bob>- Gah!
>>
>> Gah! is spoken by both Jim and Bob, but that was likely not intended. If
>> this causes confusion, we should make validators warn about multiple voices
>> with with no closing </v>.
>>
>
> Or we can say that nesting cues is not important enough to be supported,
> and make <v> imply </v>?
>
> --
> Simon Pieters
> Opera Software
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20110103/11b96511/attachment-0002.htm>