- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 20:21:05 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13357 --- Comment #4 from Bob Lund <b.lund@cablelabs.com> 2011-08-25 20:21:03 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > How is this kind distinguished in existing video formats? > > > > That is, what types would this map to in H.264, WebM, or Ogg files? > > In Ogg such a track would just be under the role "main" because such mixed > content is not the best way to publish content - it's better to keep such > content separate. Once mixed, it's basically impossible to get back to the > individual parts and e.g. remove the audio description again. As such it is the > new "main". It has also not been a common case to deal with yet. > > This doesn't quite match with the user experience though and where such content > is delivered, it has to be made clear to the user that the main content has > such other information in it. In the past I have seen it even mentioned in the > title displayed above the video and explicitly described in the description to > point out to the user what they have to expect from the content. > > In a situation where a program has to pick an adequate piece of content, e.g. > content that actually has an audio description, just using kind=main is indeed > insufficient. I'm prepared to suggest to Ogg to add the use of "+" to the roles > attribute to enable use cases such as role="audio/main+audio/audiodesc" or > role="video/main+video/sign". In DASH, which is still a work in progress, it appears <role> will be used to identify if a track is alternate or supplementary. Another <role> in the same audio set, can identify main or translation. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 25 August 2011 20:21:06 UTC