You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The implicit duration of an anonymous span child of a sequential container is explicitly defined to be zero (section 10.4); however, the implicit duration of an explicit singleton (i.e., non-nested) span in the same context
Here is an example, where I ignore whitespace to aid in viewing. Given a fragment:
Here, anon2 is assigned an indefinite implicit duration because its parent is an explicit span which defaults to 'par' time containment semantics. Since SMIL requires a seq container that contains an indefinite duration child to also be indefinite, then that indefinite propagates up the node tree.
This seems counterintuitive. I propose to resolve by a slight change in 10.4 from the current text:
"if the anonymous span's parent time container is a parallel time container, then the implicit duration is equivalent to the indefinite duration value as defined by [SMIL 2.1]; if the anonymous span's parent time container is a sequential time container, then the implicit duration is equivalent to zero"
to read:
"if the anonymous span's nearest explicit time container ancestor is a sequential time container, then the implicit duration is equivalent to zero; otherwise, it is equivalent to the indefinite duration value as defined by [SMIL 2.1]"
and add the following Note
"Note: An element is an explicit time container if it specifies a timeContainer attribute."
Reworking the above example with the new text, we get: