- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 16:47:48 +1100
- To: Victor Carbune <victor.carbune@gmail.com>
- Cc: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, "public-texttracks@w3.org" <public-texttracks@w3.org>
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Victor Carbune <victor.carbune@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer > <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'll draw up some examples of how I think it could work without >> resizing regions. That will also avoid re-drawing regions every time >> another cue is rendered into the region. > > I read your following examples, and the main disagreement point is > along the same lines: non-snap-to-lines cues in regions. If we want to > unify, supporting only snap-to-lines cues within the region is the > first step, mapping non-snap-to-lines-cues to regions auto-sized to > match cue text is the second. > > One other major advantage of not supporting non-snap-to-lines cues > within regions is that you will avoid overlap completely (since text > can only snap in lines). > > The last aspect is the anonymous region of the size of the video, > while I'm not entirely happy about it, I already mentioned that I like > it because it keeps the simplicity of VTT - you can have a cue with > text and line index and you're done. I tried re-doing the examples with the way that you're looking at them, which I think ends up being example 1 basically having a full viewport and every cue having a region around it covering the same dimensions. I believe the rest is unchanged. Correct? Silvia.
Received on Monday, 3 March 2014 05:48:35 UTC