- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 15:26:36 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24997 --- Comment #11 from Bob Lund <b.lund@cablelabs.com> --- (In reply to Silvia Pfeiffer from comment #9) > (In reply to Bob Lund from comment #6) > > For MPEG-4 metadata text track, you've used a list of sample entry codes > > instead of 'meta' handler type. Beyond, 'mett' and 'metx', I do not know if > > this list is accurate or not. > > I went through the list at > https://www.w3.org/community/inbandtracks/wiki/Main_Page#ISOBMFF_2 and > picked all those that were marked as "TextTrack". This is about how to > identify that a track is indeed a text track, so if that's wrong, let me > know what else I should write. Current text is fine. My mistake - I thought this was related to determination of metadata kind. > > > > For MPEG-2 TS there are many many non-audio/video stream types beyond those > > explicitly identified as metadata (0x05, 0x80 - 0xff), with no identified > > use case for exposing them to script. > > If these are not sufficient, can you please let me know how to identify a > text track of kind @metadata in MPEG-2 TS. These are fine. I was responding to your question about no default to metadata in the MPEG-2 case. > > > For MPEG-4, it seems that all metadata tracks would be identified by a > > handler type of 'meta'. Is there a use case where that is not so? > > That's what the patch says, too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 15:26:38 UTC