RE: WebVTT signature

I would very much prefer the 'extend the format in backwards-compatible ways' approach; IMO we need a baseline / core spec and parser algorithm, and a WebVTT file with additional (future) functionality should degrade gracefully to a 'v1' WebVTT file in a 'v1' parser.

'However, if the future WebVTT maintainers want to break compat completely, it is possible to use a different signature (e.g. "WEBVTT2").'
Please, please - not another caption file format :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Pieters [mailto:simonp@opera.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 5:54 AM
To: public-texttracks@w3.org; David Singer
Subject: Re: WebVTT signature

On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:34:46 +0100, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:

> I also wonder whether it would be prudent to put a marker on this 
> line, for a version, in case we ever need to do something where the 
> author needs a v2 or greater implementation (and prefers nothing on a 
> v1
> implementation)

I think we should aim for never going there (just extend the format in backwards-compatible ways). However, if the future WebVTT maintainers want to break compat completely, it is possible to use a different signature (e.g. "WEBVTT2").

--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 16:55:59 UTC