- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:02:51 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- cc: public-texttracks@w3.org
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > > The fact is that roll-up captions are a standard means in which TV > captions have been provided in the past and that publishers want these > replicated in exactly the same way on the Web. This is why YouTube had > to develop this feature, too. Since we are making WebVTT a universal > format in which all existing captioning from TV can be represented on > the Web, too, we have to support this case. WebVTT is definitely _not_ a format "in which all existing captioning from TV can be represented on the Web". The Web is its own medium. We shouldn't be adopting all the mistakes of past mediums. > Captions are a legal part of a video - if you want to present a video on > the Web identically to how it has been authored, we need this support, > otherwise it's not the same artistic object and sites run into copyright > issues. I don't buy that for a minute. If you can get the permission to publish the content in the first place, you can get the permission to publish it using the Web's technologies. > It doesn't matter if what is presented is aesthetically more pleasing > than an alternative presentation - we don't change the content of a > movie for display on the Web either just because we don't think a part > of it is not aesthetically pleasing. Yes, we do. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2011 00:03:18 UTC