Re: A new proposal for how to deal with text track cues

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:50:57 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer  
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>  
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think trying to split the interfaces for WebVTT cues make sense,
>> since the kind can be changed dynamically,
>
> The @kind is a readonly attribute - I don't think it can be changed
> dynamically. If you know of a way to change the @kind dynamically, I
> think we should stop that possibility. I don't think it makes sense
> to, e.g., have cues with image content be able to dynamically convert
> to descriptions or other types of cue content.

HTMLTrackElement.track is writable, and TextTrack.kind "must return the  
text track kind of the text track that the TextTrack object represents."  
so in effect TextTrack.kind can change at any time.

>> and the actual content of a
>> WebVTT file can be the same regardless of the kind. For example, what  
>> would
>> happen if the kind is changed while the WebVTT files is being received  
>> and
>> parsed? And if the kind is changed later, should the file be re-parsed?
>
> If you wanted cues to end up on a track of a different kind, you'd
> have to copy them to a different cue type first and then add them to
> that track. I think that's a reasonable requirement given the vastly
> different types of content that can end up in a cue.

But they're not vastly different, every WebVTT kind can contain the exact  
same markup. Adding new interfaces just hides some of the information,  
right?

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Opera Software

Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 08:08:17 UTC