W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > March 2009

ISSUE-4 (nessy): Should we pre-define some track names?

From: Media Fragments Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:04:03 +0000 (GMT)
To: public-media-fragment@w3.org
Message-Id: <20090304150403.E2A48C6DB0@barney.w3.org>

ISSUE-4 (nessy): Should we pre-define some track names?

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/tracker/issues/4

Raised by: Silvia Pfeiffer
On product: 

Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Mar/0008.html

We can consider it is up to the container format to define the track names. We could recommend that there be a naming scheme such as video[0] ... video[n] and audio[0] ... audio[n] to address multiple a/v tracks, maybe even text[0] ... text[n]. But I don't think they make much sense - it would be better the names chosen had some semantic meaning, such as "video", "sign-language", "audio", "music", "speech", "sound-effects", "audio annotations", "subtitles-en", subtitles-de", "karaoke-en", "lyrics" etc.

And .. yes, at some point somebody should have some standard names for these - in particular for accessibility it would be nice to be able to say through the protocol "I want no audio tracks, but video and sign-language and all text tracks".

Maybe there is a scheme that we need to develop, where the codec type is also part of the naming, e.g. video.sign-language, audio.annotations, video.music etc. We haven't thought much about structure for describing tracks yet.
Received on Wednesday, 4 March 2009 15:04:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:32 GMT