W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > February 2003

Re: TT and subtitling

From: geoff freed <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>
Date: 04 Feb 2003 13:05:59 -0500
Message-ID: <-1167758539geoff_freed@wgbh.org>
To: <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, <public-tt@w3.org>, <Johnb@screen.subtitling.com>, <public-tt-request@w3.org>


>However these distinctions are IMHO far removed from the requirements of a
>TT standard - which should be to define an agnostic mechanism for the timed
>delivery of text. Using XML, tags to provide distinction between the text
>categories (for want of a better term) should be optional, but undefined by
>the standard. The TT standard should IMHO only **define** tags that are
>necessary for the temporal control of the display of text.

I'm not so sure we can get away with this.  There are examples today of multi-level
 line-21 captioning (e.g., verbatim vs edited to a specific reading level), with no way
 to easily indicate what's in the data streams.  We could perhaps solve that with
 metadata that defines at least two types of data...

verbatim:true/false
level: x, xx, xxx, etc., where x=editing level, reading speed, whatever

...indicating to the user that two or three or four streams of data exist.  Of course, this
 opens up the problem of defining levels.  I'm not sure that's appropriate for this
 group.  But we could at least leave space for the options.  

Geoff/NCAM


On Tuesday, February 4, 2003, Johnb@screen.subtitling.com wrote:
>
>Al Gilman wrote:
>
>	One is coverage:  does the text track cover what is said in the
>sound track,
>	or does it cover more by way of sounds or action.  [And
>terms/language to 
>	describe the answer to "if more, then what?"]
>
>	But aside from texture, there is the granularity of comparison in
>	determining the goodness of fit.  Some captions will abridge the
>dialog.
>	The same information in different words.  That is to say, they will
>describe
>	what is said in the sound track in other words, even 'though in the
>same
>	natural language.  These are useful in educational and
>learning-difficulty
>	applications.
>
>It has always been true that subtitles are NOT verbatim. There are
>limitations in the number of characters per second that can be displayed via
>any subtitling mechanism - not to mention the issues when multiple speakers
>are simultaneously speaking. Part of the art of subtitling (by which I mean
>the process of creating subtitles for a program) is to capture the essence
>of what is spoken in a succinct form. In captioning there is a greater
>tendency towards a verbatim transcript. (SMPTE definitions
>used).
>
>
>regards John Birch
>
>The views and opinions expressed are the author's own and do not necessarily
>reflect the views and opinions of the Screen Subtitling Systems
>Limited.
>
Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2003 13:06:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 November 2009 22:41:26 GMT