- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 16:13:42 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14552 --- Comment #5 from Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> 2011-10-25 16:13:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > I've never liked having to use entities for < and >, that seems like a major > opportunity for error in converting srt or just creating the files in general, > so have some sympathy for <<, but using <> as an escape digraph doesn't seem > any better. I agree, this is not exactly perfect. &escapes; are also not perfect, as we'd need &slash; which does not exist in HTML and almost none of the HTML escapes work in WebVTT, so it's not clear that having similar syntax is only a good thing. > I mean, it would be a great idea if everyone creating captions was an expert, > but we have the opposite issue. > > I would like to have a way to specify comments, and C-style is straightforward > to parse, but my first thought was that I would have found shell style '#' or > html-style '<!-- ... -->' comments more natural. Are there any of those in your > SRT corpus? <!-- --> doesn't work for commenting out entire cues: <!-- 00:01.000 --> 00:02.000 Bla --> # occurs in 4211/65643 files. Example: 393 00:24:26,887 --> 00:24:29,276 # Hey, I know what I'm gonna do // occurs in 2229/65643 files. Example: 510 00:40:43,500 --> 00:46:41,300 Subtitulado por aRGENTeaM http://foro.argenteam.net -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2011 16:13:45 UTC