Re: TextTrack API changes

On Mon, 06 May 2013 14:54:15 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer  
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've also put together the core of the discussion at
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:Spfeiffe/TextTrackChange with my
> current thoughts on how to resolve it.
>
> Please let me know if I've missed an argument.
>
> Also, I'm looking for feedback on the suggested changes, which are in
> summary:
> * add a .content attribute (of type ArrayBuffer) to TextTrackCue to  
> provide
> a generic IDL attribute for the content of a cue

What's the use case for .content?

> * re-introduce the TextTrackCue constructor

The wiki page says

[[
previously it was possible to construct a cue of any type and append it to  
a track with interpretation of cue content done by JavaScript
]]

This is false. It was only possible to create WebVTT cues with the  
TextTrackCue() constructor. (This is an argument against reintroducing it.)

[[
re-introduce constructor, but only if there is no getCueAsHTML() API,  
which would require a default conversion algorithm
]]

This doesn't make sense to me.

[[
  TextTrackCue gets associated with a kind when attached to a TextTrack  
(e.g. becomes a generic caption or metadata cue)
]]

This is no different from WebVTTCue, right?

[[
  TextTrackCue by itself has no cue type - WebVTTCue has WebVTT as the cue  
type, which includes an algorithm to convert the content in .content (or  
.text) to HTML
]]

What's the use case for constructing a cue without a cue type? What  
specifies the behavior of such a cue?

> Regards,
> Silvia.

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Monday, 6 May 2013 13:16:16 UTC