- From: Tim Hull <tim@globaltimoto.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 23:45:16 -0300
- To: public-texttracks@w3.org
Since you ask. > > What do others think? Should we introduce an explicit line break > character such as<br> and ignore any CR and LF characters inside the > cue? It would be preferable if the form for breaking lines where an author expected them to occur could be automated, but I hazard a guess that it would be fairly difficult to gauge all the authors intended breaks. I would be disappointed if the following could not be achieved one way or other. I for one prefer to weight lines with the following rules: 1. Add more weight to the bottom of 2 lines, so that the caption eats less into the view port. so instead of: word word word word word word word word word word it would be: word word word word word word word word word word 2. If there is a rest in speech denoted by a comma, attempt to break the line immediately after the comma, thus breaking the line where there is a momentary break in speech. This gives the reader a chance to glance back at the video at the break: word word word word, word word word word word but if there is more text before the comma on the 1st line than the 2nd do not attempt to modify the weight as stated in rule 1 because it is far better for reading if the break in speech is mimicked in the line break, again to give the reader a chance to glance back at the video. word word word word word word, word word word word 3. If there is more than 1 comma in the text attempt to weight more of them to them bottom line following rule 1. word word word word, word word word, word word word, word If the above could be automated that would certainly deal with a big chunk of the cases where I insert breaks manually. Next is more difficult 4. A momentary break in speech delimited with a comma is a great and easy way to deal with line breaks, but when they do not exist the next thing I look for are ways to end the top line with an important word and begin the bottom line with what follows. This helps the reader to pick out the important word which might otherwise be skipped or glossed over in the rush to read the rest of the sentence. I couple this rule with rule 1 where the important word takes precedence: Better Once upon a time there was a word that often got into a lot of trouble because it kept getting lost. as opposed to Once upon a time there was a word that often got into a lot of trouble because it kept getting lost. or Once upon a time there was a word that often got into a lot of trouble because it kept getting lost. Perhaps there are some linguistic rules to cater for this, I only know them intuitively, not theoretically, but it definitely helps. Tim
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2012 02:48:53 UTC