W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > September 2011

[Bug 13943] The "bad cue" handling is stricter than it should be

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:19:47 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1R3xo3-0001Ri-Ge@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13943

--- Comment #6 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-09-14 22:19:46 UTC ---
Right now we can add comment blocks that can come anywhere in the file by using
syntax like:

--> COMMENT
this is a comment
even if it includes
timing lines like 
00:00.000 --> 00:01.000
this; comment block
ends at next newline.

Or we can add default settings blocks, which can come anywhere in the file. For
example, here we have a hypothetical default block which sets the defaults for
the first hour and the second hour of the file:

--> DEFAULT
00:00.000 --> 01:00.000
A:start
01:00.000 --> 02:00.000
A:end

I don't understand why this extensibility would be less valuable than
recovering from cases where a user has accidentally given two IDs to a cue. How
common is that going to be, realistically speaking? It seems like a very odd
error to optimise for.

-- 
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 Wednesday, 14 September 2011 22:19:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:18 UTC