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

[Bug 13943] <track> The "bad cue" handling is stricter than it should be

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:39:04 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1R8j72-00024x-55@jessica.w3.org>

--- Comment #12 from Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> 2011-09-28 01:39:02 UTC ---
> > I don't really understand what authoring mistake is going to end up with that
> > being necessary. Why do you think multiple IDs is a likely error? Surely most
> > authors wouldn't provide any IDs at all.
> I don't think it's a likely error, I just think the parser should be robust and
> not throw away cues when it would be just as easy to recover.
> (I would also like some consistency on this point, fixing just this while
> leaving other aspects of the parser very strict would admittedly be arbitrary.)

How many lines do you want to parse before expecting a line with "-->" in it?
This has the potential danger that if somebody really screwed up their WEBVTT
file and it's a very long file that we end up parsing the whole file before we
notice that there aren't any cues. Is that desirable?

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 Wednesday, 28 September 2011 01:39:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:02:04 UTC