W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > October 2011

[Bug 14552] <track> support // and /* */ comments everywhere except in the signature line

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 16:13:42 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1RIjdG-0001ic-NV@jessica.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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:02:06 UTC