Re: Survey ready on Media Text Associations proposal

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 10, 2010, at 8:25 PM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:10:01 +0800, Silvia Pfeiffer
>> <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is the intention that we specify a track selection algorithm with exact
>>>> rules for which track to enable based on settings, or should this be
>>>> left to
>>>> UAs to override ad-hoc?
>>>
>>> I don't think anything is prescribed to UAs in the HTML spec - if at
>>> all we can only make recommendations on what override rules a UA uses.
>>> No?
>>
>> There are very clear rules for resource selection for <source> and no
>> provision for the UA to override this. I'm asking if the intention is to
>> specify with the same level of detail which <track> to select and not allow
>> UAs to override this, or if we should simply say that the UA can do whatever
>> it wants. I don't like the latter because it will certainly lead to poor
>> interoperability.
>
> I would prefer if the rules for <track> are as precise as the ones for
> <source>, but I also think that this level of detail can wait until after
> the proposal is submitted to the HTML WG.

OK, that's fine by me.

It will, however, involve a lot less actual required rules than for
<source>, because the minimum that we will probably require UAs to do
is nothing: just accept the choice of the page author and that's it.
We can recommend introduction of a list of preferred languages for
captions in the browser preferences and the selection algorithm will
then go through the list to override the page author's choice based on
user requirements. But that last bit isn't strictly necessary for
display of the captions. This is why I wrote "can decide to".

Cheers,
Silvia.

Received on Thursday, 11 March 2010 06:59:58 UTC