- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 11:37:31 -0700
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, "Edward O'Connor" <hober0@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org> wrote: > # To me, your question seems totally irrelevant to this WG. > # If the $99.99 device contains a Web browser, then yes. > # If it doesn't contain a Web browser, the capabilities of > # the device are not relevant to <video>. > > The working group is chartered to work on a definition of the > Hypertext Markup Language and its related APIs, not on the > definition of a "Web browser". > > A device which can parse conforming HTML, find appropriate > <video> elements within it, and then play the video, > with captions, is a perfectly acceptable use case for > determining requirements for the HyperText Markup Language. For what it's worth, I'm happy to keep the work on WebSRT in the WhatWG working group. We can always submit it to the W3C once its a more stable proposal. That would seem allow us to work on the technical aspects of the spec in parallel with solving the complex question of which working group should handle it. / Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 18:38:25 UTC