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

RE: RE: Proposal 0.0

From: <Johnb@screen.subtitling.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 16:32:21 -0000
Message-ID: <11E58A66B922D511AFB600A0244A722E093EB6@NTMAIL>
To: geoff_freed@wgbh.org
Cc: public-tt@w3.org

Johnb@screen.subtitling.com wrote:

>TCIn 01:03:28:18	TCOut 01:03:30:00 	"Jack, je tenais à vous
>TCIn 01:03:32:05 	TCOut 01:03:35:10 	"Elle va mal. Son état
>s&apos;est beaucoup aggravé.
>TCIn 01:03:35:24 	TCOut 01:03:38:04	"Je lui ai donné des

Geoff Freed wrote:

>Between subtitles two and three, above, there's a pause of 14 frames.  For
such a short pause, I don't see a 
>need to require an out time to erase the display.  Instead, simply let the
third subtitle replace the second.  
>That's how many captioning agencies do it today, and it's a good model.
Captions that are
>sequenced with tiny pauses between them cause the viewer to blink, and
that's annoying.  
>If you need to pause between captions-- e.g., if there's nobody speaking-- 
>*then* erase the display with an out time.  Otherwise it would be best to
simply let the captions appear 
>smoothly one after the other with no pause.

I'm not going to argue the case either way for timing between subtitles /
captions. It's entirely a matter for
the author and intended audience to resolve. I've seen it done all ways :-).
In the European market subtitles tend to be spaced. For add-on and snake
subtitling, sub second intervals for subtitling would be required.

Regardless, for TT to be universally useful, restrictions on duration or
timing accuracy should be avoided.


John Birch

The views and opinions expressed are the author's own and do not necessarily
reflect the views and opinions of Screen Subtitling Systems Limited.
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2003 11:24:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:23:58 UTC