- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:50:15 +1000
- To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Cc: Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>, "public-html@w3.org (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12 April 2011 22:46, Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com> wrote: > >> My point was that as far as I know, no media file format has a standard way to mark a text track as a "transcript". Therefore the media format specific metadata has to be defined, eg. what 'udta' or 'meta' value signals a transcript in a QuickTime/MPEG-4 file, before the HTML WG can define a mapping to it. > > But the HTML WG doesn't need to define mappings of specific fields to > specific formats, just the *interface* to use should the field be > available. Right now we have [1]: > > [[ > A label > This is a human-readable string intended to identify the track for the user. > ]] > > We could have: > > [[ > A transcript > This is a text representation of the spoken word in the media. > ]] > > - what either of those is mapped to in the media format-specific > metadata is up to 3rd party decoder developers, not the HTML WG. > > Having said that, I don't personally believe it's desirable to specify > and/or restrict the naming of the potential name-value fields, better > to provide a general-purpose slot and "let the market decide". Are you motivated for this request by the same functionality that Web pages expose through <meta> tags as name-value pairs? Silvia. > > Cheers, > Danny. > > [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#text-track-label > > -- > http://danny.ayers.name > >
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2011 01:51:02 UTC