W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2013

RE: TextTrackCue changes

From: Jerry Smith (WINDOWS) <jdsmith@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 22:40:57 +0000
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
CC: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <87250681a9d34aa2ba0b76ef0f6d71be@BY2PR03MB041.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
My wording was imprecise.  I was disagreeing with the commit on the change because it reduces capability on the textTrackCue object that is currently used by websites.  I interpreted Glenn's comments as understanding that, but perhaps I misread him.

I noted Ian's comment about retaining the constructor, the text attribute and (apparently previously removed) getCueAsHTML as being bad design.  As things stand, the generic cue object is the only one defined that supports TTML for these operations.  I don't agree with removing them.


-----Original Message-----
From: Silvia Pfeiffer [mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:32 PM
To: Jerry Smith (WINDOWS)
Cc: public-html
Subject: Re: TextTrackCue changes

Hi Jerry,

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Jerry Smith (WINDOWS) <jdsmith@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I see two comments opposed to restoring the text attribute and the constructor to the base texttrackcue object.  I am in favor of that, and thought others were as well.  How was this specific topic resolved and committed?  Was there a broader consensus for this change?

Indeed. As a result of the lengthy discussions, they have now been removed from the base TextTrackCue interface and thus also removed the spec fork (Glenn's email points out all the right spec pointers.)

So, what you're asking for has indeed been achieved.

Received on Thursday, 26 September 2013 22:41:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:05 UTC