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

Image properties in the table in Section 9.1.2 should be at Level 3 #268

Open
wantehchang opened this issue Oct 18, 2024 · 3 comments
Open
Assignees

Comments

@wantehchang
Copy link
Collaborator

Leo,

The image properties in the table in Section 9.1.2 are documented to be at Level 1. Since their containing box is ipco and ipco is at Level 2, I think all the image properties should be at Level 3.

@wantehchang
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Leo: Perhaps the levels in the table in Section 9.1.2 are unrelated to the levels in the table in Section 9.1.1?

I guess the levels in the table in Section 9.1.1 are the levels in the file, whereas the levels in the table in Section 9.1.1 are the levels in the containing box (meta or ipco)?

@leo-barnes
Copy link
Collaborator

I guess the levels in the table in Section 9.1.1 are the levels in the file, whereas the levels in the table in Section 9.1.1 are the levels in the containing box (meta or ipco)?

Yes, I think that is what @cconcolato was going for. I think the current structure works, but is slightly confusing. Alternatives that I can think of:

  1. Change the table to look like the one in 9.1.1. We could then remove the "Containing box" column.
  2. Remove the levels from the columns and always state the containing box in the "Containing box" column.

Thoughts?

@leo-barnes
Copy link
Collaborator

  1. Remove the levels from the columns and always state the containing box in the "Containing box" column.

The drawback of this approach is that it's not as easy to visually see the tree structure.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants