- From: Bob Lund <B.Lund@CableLabs.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 14:06:58 +0000
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Eric Winkelman <E.Winkelman@cablelabs.com>
- CC: "Ladd, Pat" <Pat_Ladd2@cable.comcast.com>, "Clift, Graham" <Graham.Clift@am.sony.com>, "public-inbandtracks@w3.org" <public-inbandtracks@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Silvia Pfeiffer [mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 7:44 AM > To: Bob Lund > Cc: Ladd, Pat; Clift, Graham; public-inbandtracks@w3.org > Subject: Re: MPEG-2 TS Closed Caption mapping > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Bob Lund <B.Lund@cablelabs.com> > wrote: > > > > > > On 5/18/14, 8:31 PM, "Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Bob Lund <B.Lund@cablelabs.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Silvia Pfeiffer [mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com] > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 3:19 AM > >>>> To: Ladd, Pat > >>>> Cc: Clift, Graham; Bob Lund; public-inbandtracks@w3.org > >>>> Subject: Re: MPEG-2 TS Closed Caption mapping > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Ladd, Pat > >>>> <Pat_Ladd2@cable.comcast.com> wrote: > >>>> > Graham; > >>>> > > >>>> > I took a different meaning from your question. In > >>>> > >>>>http://rawgit.com/silviapfeiffer/HTMLSourcingInbandTracks/master/in > d > >>>>ex.h tml section 3, the table in step 3 indicates that when a > >>>>Caption Service Descriptor is signaled in a PMT a TextTrack is > >>>>created with kind "captions" and in the case of captions digitized > >>>>in the video stream, i.e. CEA708, the id is the PID of the video > >>>>elementary stream carrying the captions. > >>>> > >>>> Correct. > >>>> > >>>> > What I gather from that is setting the captions TextTrack mode > >>>> > to > >>>>showing > >>>> will cause the captions in the video stream to be rendered. > >>>> > >>>> Incorrect. They can only be rendered by the browser if the browser > >>>>understands the caption format. For example, WebM has captions in > >>>>WebVTT format - they will be exposed as a TextTrack with VTTCue > >>>>captions and thus follow the WebVTT rendering spec. If your > >>>>captions come from a > >>>> MPEG4 file in a CEA708 track, a TextTrack can be created, but the > >>>>captions cannot be exposed in a renderable form, since there is no > >>>>TextTrackCue format for CEA708. > >>> > >>> If the captions are to be rendered ONLY by the UA then it would seem > >>>there is no need to define a cue format. It would be implementation > >>>dependent how the UA formats caption data for rendering. > >> > >>Are you thinking of a situation where browsers will render caption > >>tracks, but not expose them to the JS API? > > > > Yes. > > > >> In this situation, how does > >>the Web developer know that there is a caption track visible? > > > > A caption text track will be created. The app can check the mode of > > that track. If Œshowing¹ then the UA is rendering the captions. If > > hidden, then the UA is not rendering. Yes > > So you *are* exposing the track to JS - but without cues? You are expecting > the browser to react to JS changing the track @mode. Yes > > You are expecting it to render CEA708 cues when this empty track is made > 'showing'. But you are not expecting to write a spec for browsers for how to > do the rendering? Are you expecting them to implement a > CEA708 spec? Yes >How is that going to fit into the browser rendering loop and the > browser coodinate system? You're going to need a spec. Why isn't this an UA implementation issue? The reference implementation we did created WebVTT cues from the raw 708 captions data. > > > >> This is > >>as "bad" as burnt-in captions > > > > Not sure what you mean by Œas bad as¹. > > JS and Web pages have no access to the text that was the origin of burnt-in > captions. You're replicating this situation when you don't expose captions as > cues. It makes it impossible to use the text, e.g. > for search index building and thus disallows direct access to time offsets in > videos with relevant content. > > > >> and would better be exposed to the > >>browser API in that way: as a video track with burnt-in captions (a > >>VideoTrack with VideoTrack.kind="captions"). There would be no need to > >>expose any text track for this. > > > > AFAICT, there is no kind for burned in captions, which might be > > main-captions? > > Yes there is. See: > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/embedded- > content.html#dom-videotrack-kind > . A kind of "captions" on a video track signifies burnt-in captions. > Text tracks with rendered captions but no cues are indeed better exposed as > video tracks of kind="cpations". > > Cheers, > Silvia.
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:07:37 UTC