W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2010

[whatwg] WebSRT feedback

From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:06:57 -0700
Message-ID: <op.vj715etjsr6mfa@philip-pc>
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 21:37:06 -0700, Silvia Pfeiffer  
<silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Philip J?genstedt  
> <philipj at opera.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> Styling hooks were requested.If we only have the predefined tags (i, b,
>> ...) and voices, these will most certainly be abused, e.g. resulting in  
>> <i>
>> being used where italics isn't wanted or <v Foo> being used just for
>> styling, breaking the accessibility value it has.
>>
>> As an aside, the idea of using an HTML parser for the cue text wasn't  
>> very
>> popular.
>>
>
> I believe that this feedback was provided by a person representing the  
> deaf
> or hard-of-hearing community and not the subtitling community. In  
> particular
> at FOMS I heard the opposite opinion.

Is "this feedback" about styling hooks or HTML as the cue text format?  
Both?

On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 01:57:17 -0700, James Graham <jgraham at opera.com> wrote:

> On 10/06/2010 04:04 AM, Philip J?genstedt wrote:
>
>> As an aside, the idea of using an HTML parser for the cue text wasn't
>> very popular.
>
> Why? Were any technical reasons given?

The question was directed at the media player/framework developers  
present. One of them didn't care and one was strongly opposed on the basis  
of bloat. This was an aside, if anyone is serious about using the HTML  
fragment parser for WebSRT, we really should approach the developer  
mailing lists of media players/frameworks. I doubt we will find much love,  
but would be happy to be shown wrong.

-- 
Philip J?genstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 13:06:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:01 UTC