- From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 08:55:02 +0200
- To: "Jerry Smith (WINDOWS)" <jdsmith@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Brendan Long <self@brendanlong.com>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Jerry Smith (WINDOWS) <jdsmith@microsoft.com> wrote: > Is there an assumption that thin or thick TextTrackCues would be for text only representations? The existing cue definition (not the newer drafts) can adequately source styled cues and works with getCueAsHTML on separate WebVTT or TTML caption files. For compatibility reasons, these should continue to work. > > The use of format specific cue objects like VTTCue may allow tuned attributes for a specific format, but they also fragment the programming model and make it more difficult for websites to support content with mixed caption formats, do they not? > > I have had some side discussions with Silvia and others about the overarching goals of this revision. Some have replied that it is to focus format specific syntax and features on objects that clearly have a format specific intent. That would seem predicated on an assumption that a format agnostic solution, usually the desired goal for web specifications, is not possible. Do we agree that is the case? What would a format agnostic solution be? It seems like you would have to pick one rendering model and require everything to use it. I would be fine with only the old TextTrackCue and the WebVTT rendering model, but that wasn't popular, hence the recent spec changes. I still don't know if there are any browser vendors who really plan support for any rendering model other than WebVTT. Philip
Received on Friday, 13 September 2013 06:55:29 UTC