Re: Support for advanced caption features (inc rollup)

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Dec 2012, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> >
> > It is not blindly accepted, but provided by somebody who has been
> > involved in formulating the CVAA. Please go and check with the YouTube
> > lawyers if you do not take my word on this.
>
> Can you at least cite what paragraph of the CVAA you think requires what
> you describe?
>
>
> > > I'm not objecting to roll-up, I'm objecting to browsers (and
> > > especially WebVTT) supporting features for faithful representation of
> > > other caption formats, especially caption formats that have
> > > constraints that do not apply on the Web.
> >
> > Most of those features have been developed as a reaction to user
> > requirements, which are no different on the Web than they are on TV.
>
> The requirements are similar (though not even remotely identical, for
> example there's no way to drag and drop cues on a TV), but the constraints
> are vastly different (for example, live TV historically couldn't have a
> two-second delay loop and users care more about syncing captions to the
> picture than readable captions, but on the Internet a two-second delay is
> a non-issue even for live streams and so we can get readable captions and
> still get the sync right).
>

A two-second delay will certainly be an issue for real-time interactive
communication.  Real-time captioning in these scenarios should be displayed
as soon as it is available and any delay will negatively affect access to
the conversation.  The idea of rendering regions seems crucial here.


>
>
> > In fact, the only feature that is TV-specific is to avoid an overscan
> > area and we already support this in the spec:
> > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16864 .
>
> That is by far not the only TV-specific feature of TV captions.
>
> The moving captions is one example (as discussed above); others include
> monospaced captions, having to fit captions into limited bandwidth, the
> lack of user input mechanisms, having to put the captions on the video,
> etc etc etc.
>
>
> > > If there are specific use cases that should be addressed, please file
> > > bugs describing them.
> >
> > These features have been discussed on this mailing list for more than a
> > year. Also there are bugs at:
> > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16706
>
> This bug has no use cases.
>
>
> > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15859
>
> This bug (or rather, the bug I duped it to) has a proposal that's being
> worked through currently.
>
>
> > I could register bugs on the other issues (such as a separate styling of
> > text background to cue background; moving captions in the UA), but as
> > long as the big things are not solved (such as rollup; fixed
> > positioning), it seems moot to start worrying about the smaller issues
> > that fall out as a result of solving the big issues.
>
> If you want use cases considered, file bugs.
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
>