W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2013

Re: [whatwg] Reconsidering how we deal with text track cues

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:21:16 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2nBcRZV5mW3+wA2f=pBifF1rCd-T5+_BQLQ9mv4rhGkxQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brendan Long <self@brendanlong.com>
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Brendan Long <self@brendanlong.com> wrote:
> On 06/17/2013 12:41 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>> Why VTTCaptionCue and not just HTMLCue? It seems like any cue that can
>>> be rendered needs to be able to provide its content as HTML, and once we
>>> have that, the browser shouldn't care where we got that HTML from.
>> That could indeed be a different way to approach caption cues.
>> However, authoring caption text on video with only the formatting
>> markup that a caption may need and limiting HTML functionality to
>> features that captions need was one of the motivations for creating
>> WebVTT.
>
> I don't think it's necessary to use the same language for authoring as
> display though. Since we already have rules for rendering HTML, and
> WebVTT seems to be a subset of HTML (with some special CSS rules, and
> some shorthand tags), I think the easiest way to handle it would be to
> translate WebVTT cues into HTML+CSS, then rely on the existing rendering
> engine.

That's exactly what the WebVTT rendering algorithm does and HTMLCue is
not necessary for this.

However, you should be able to author WebVTT cues in JavaScript -
that's what WebVTTCue was created for.

HTH,
Silvia.
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2013 03:22:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:22 UTC