Re: WebVTT spec

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 6:57 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2013, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A new draft document is now at
> > > >
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/text-tracks/raw-file/default/webvtt/webvtt.html
> > >
> > > Is this the source file? I'm confused. With scripting disabled, all
> > > the styles, cross-references, etc, seem to stop working. Many elements
> > > are missing auto-generated IDs, <a> elements without href=""s abound,
> > > etc.
> >
> > Yes, it's the source file.
> >
> > ReSpec uses the source file and transforms it - it does everything in
> > JavaScript. So, if you disable scripting, you get none of the goodness,
> > including everything that you list above. It's how it works.
>
> Wow, that sounds terrible. Can we not use a statically generated form?
>

Yes, there is a statically created form, but we will use it when we publish
it outside the dvcs. I'm still trying to figure out where that publication
location would be.


Requiring that JavaScript be enabled to make use of _specs_, which are
> frequently printed, seems a bit excessive. I'm all for providing
> additional interactive features (e.g. the <dfn> magic in the WHATWG
> specs), but requiring that JS be used to view the spec seems really bad.
>

Indeed.


> I've, however, added the WHATWG spec as well, because it is where it was
> > originally started, so that's just fair.
>
> Having both means that when they conflict, implementors won't know which
> to refer to.
>

Hopefully that does not happen, and if it does, they point it out so we can
fix it.

Silvia.