Re: WebVTT spec

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:45 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> > >
> > > There is the WebVTT file spec, which is used outside HTML as well, 
> > > so this is separate. But then there are the objects in HTML that 
> > > parse WebVTT. So, those need to be in some kind of "glue spec". 
> > > Could be an appendix to WebVTT, I guess.
> >
> > I think that's the wrong way to look at it. It's the same kind of 
> > reasoning that led to HTML4 and DOM2 HTML being separate specs, with 
> > all the tons of bugs that created.
> >
> > Conceptually, WebVTT is an abstract language, like HTML, with a 
> > defined data model and a defined set of rendering rules. It happens to 
> > have a textual serialisation, and it happens to have a DOM API. Not 
> > all implementations need to have both, not all users need to use both.
> >
> > However, they are both intimately related. We can't change one without 
> > changing the other. Putting them in different specs, or making one a 
> > second-class citizen, will just lead to spec bugs, and that will lead 
> > to poor interoperability and unhappy authors.
> 
> I definitely don't want it to look like the DOM API is second-class. A 
> different document structure is probably sufficient, or some more 
> introductory paragraphs. WebVTTCue will be in the WebVTT spec then, 
> right?

Sounds good. I'll try to put the pieces in the right places and fix the 
glue between WebVTT and HTML before I hand it over (should be able to do 
that today), so you don't have to clean up my mess. :-)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 22:12:39 UTC