- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:45:08 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13943 --- Comment #13 from Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> 2011-09-28 01:45:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > 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 Maybe. > 01:61.000 = 02:01.000 It would be bad if we accepted this kind of mistake IMHO. Think e.g. about 01:5432153.000 - that's neither readable nor makes it much sense at all as a time format. I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, allowing simpler time formats (such as just seconds.milliseconds) would be a nice simplification to allow and makes it easier to convert from other formats that use such a formats. On the other hand, every simplification that we introduce into authoring makes the parsing much harder. With the fixed format that is currently given, implementing a parser is really trivial. Allowing for all the exceptions and authoring errors will give us all sorts of edge cases. For example, in SRT 01:01.5 is actually interpreted by some players as 01:01.005 and by others as 01:01.500 . We'd have to introduce rules on what these things actually mean and then implement more complex parsers. -- 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, 28 September 2011 01:45:13 UTC