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

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

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:37:16 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1R8WuS-0003y4-EG@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13943

Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |

--- Comment #11 from Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> 2011-09-27 12:37:14 UTC ---
I agree with Philip. The parser shouldn't drocanianly drop cues for trivial
authoring mistakes. I don't know if we need to polish the parsing of the id
(though I don't mind that), but certainly the timestamp parsing needs
polishing. From what I remember when looking at SRT content, it's not uncommon
to have various mistakes in the timestamp. Usually you don't notice the error
(until you validate the file or check a browser's error console). The parsing
of timestamps should be DWIM (doesn't need to be compatible with SRT
implementations though).

1:01.000 = 01:01.000
01:1.000 = 01:01.000
01:01,000 = 01:01.000
01:01.5 = 01:01.500
01:01.5000 = 01:01.500
01:61.000 = 02:01.000
etc

-- 
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 Tuesday, 27 September 2011 12:37:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:19 UTC