- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:23:53 +1000
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: public-texttracks <public-texttracks@w3.org>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:03:38 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer > <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Finally, it seems slightly weird that style sheets referenced from the >>> WebVTT file itself would use the pseudo-elements, since it would mean >>> that >>> the selector has to match the <video> of which the track is associated. I >>> can see some value in being able to use the same style sheet for both the >>> HTML page and referencing it from the track. OTOH, having to say >>> ::cue(blah) >>> instead of just blah in an inline style sheet seems quite annoying. >> >> >> I definitely want to keep those. I don't think we should use different >> CSS inline in a WebVTT file than in a HTML file. That just becomes >> annoying when you want to cut and paste and move things around. I'd >> much rather live with the ::cue overhead in the WebVTT file. > > > OK. Works for me. For non-HTML environments, should the UA act as if there > was an HTML document like the one below for the purpose of selector matching > of inline style sheets? > > <html><head></head><body><video src=""></video></body> Yes. Though ... how would that work for several videos? And what if we want some to rely on this stylesheet and other not to? Should we maybe do this: <html><head></head><body><video class="608708" src=""></video></body> and then in the CSS file have video.608708 in front of all the ::cue selectors? Cheers, Silvia.
Received on Thursday, 27 September 2012 01:24:41 UTC