W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > February 2010

Re: HTML 5, SMIL, Video

From: Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 08:16:17 -0800
Cc: 'Philip Jägenstedt' <philipj@opera.com>, 'Dick Bulterman' <Dick.Bulterman@cwi.nl>, 'Silvia Pfeiffer' <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, 'Geoff Freed' <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>, public-html-a11y@w3.org, markku.hakkinen@gmail.com, symm@w3.org
Message-Id: <3DFDDC54-2CC6-48FD-92D7-DFAEEE7FA16A@apple.com>
To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>

On Feb 22, 2010, at 12:18 AM, John Foliot wrote:

>> 
>> However, there must be some order of priorities and I think reaching a
>> consensus on a complex format and having inter-operable implementations
>> shipped in several browsers is still years away.
> 
> ...and so I would suggest that a high priority of ensuring that an XML 
> marked transcript format, as a required format that browsers MUST support, 
> is important - no IMHO it's critical. SmilText, full blown DFXP, or 
> something different again; what is important is that *one* such format is 
> supported out of the gate.
> 
  I agree that we need to agree on a "richer" caption format, but are we really in such a rush to nail down which format this minute? While we can't deliberate forever, we also don't want to choose capriciously. Implementing support for even a simple format like SRT will be a significant amount of work, and adding the extra features of another format like smilText or DXFP will be significantly more work, so we must choose carefully.

eric
Received on Monday, 22 February 2010 16:16:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:02 GMT