- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 23:25:44 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21851 --- Comment #22 from xham <graham.clift@am.sony.com> --- (In reply to comment #21) > I've thought about this some more and my suggestion for resolution is at > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:Spfeiffe/TextTrackChange#.283. > 29_Removal_of_TextTrackCue_constructor > > On top of renaming TextTrackCue to AbstractTextTrackCue and introducing an > unparsed TextTrackCue API, I also suggest renaming > inBandMetadataTrackDispatchType on TextTrack to cueFormatHint. > > The cueFormatHint would be filled by the browser not just for in-band > tracks, but also for files coming from <track>. For example, parsing a > WebVTT file with captions would result in a cueFormatHint of "webvtt", but > parsing a WebVTT file with metadata or chapters or descriptions would give a > cueFormatHint of "plaintext". Or if the browser knew that it was metadata > and knew it was JSON, it could set cueFormatHint to "json". > > Then, it's clear which XXXCue object should be used to parse the .cues in > the TextTrack. You proposal for resolving "Removal of .text from TextTrackCue" is to re-introduce the .text attribute. Your proposal for resolving "Removal of TextTrackCue Constructor" is to introduce the new TextCue that inherits from TextTrackCue. However it appears that the TextCue also has a .text attribute. Is the intention to change the resolution of the first proposal to say: re-introduce the .text attribute, but on the new TextCue interface? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2013 23:25:45 UTC