On Mar 6, 2013, at 6:22 AM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote: > I am certainly not knowledgeable about what happened in the TextTracks CG. But Silivia’s original email seemed to imply that the feature was a product of the TextTracks CG: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Feb/0210.html > > >Details: > >In the TextTracks Community Group we have analysed how to introduce rollup captions using WebVTT and the HTML <track> element. > > > >11 different proposals were analysed: http://www.w3.org/community/texttracks/wiki/RollupCaptions . > > > >One proposals was picked and developed further:http://www.w3.org/community/texttracks/wiki/MultiCueBox > > If this is the case then why cannot the CG could do a Final Specification Agreement on just this proposal? > > I certainly agree that there is no relationship to this matter and a WebVTT FSA. My preference would be to treat this the same as an HTML feature request from the CSS WG, the Web Apps WG, the I18N WG or the Web & TV IG. We don't usually require such requests to come in the form of a published spec with final IPR commitments. This particular proposal has not been published in any form yet, FSA or otherwise. I understand the potential concern about circumventing the IPR policy, but I believe in this case, the actual contributors to this proposal are members of the HTML WG. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 6 March 2013 19:33:20 UTC