W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > May 2013

Re: TTML Agenda for 15/05/13 - Proposed updates to charter

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 13:27:01 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2mF8gOF1SpXoG4wCVsMCRwJi-iHcxQyXdiY+NMOOeFxLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
Cc: Michael Jordan <mijordan@adobe.com>, "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
<pal@sandflow.com> wrote:
>> Yes, you can. You can do that with any format. However, that means
>> that JS supports the TTML format, not the browser.
> So shouldn't the following two processes roughly equivalent? If not, why?
> TTML document ---------> WebVTT document -----------> UA
> TTML document ----JS----> sequence of calls to TextTrack API

Yes, they would.

In the first scenario you use a converter to go from TTML to WebVTT.
The rest is supported by the browser, including rendering.

In the second scenario you use a JS parser to get to a TextTrack and
to do the rendering.

Received on Friday, 17 May 2013 03:27:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:09 UTC