- From: Bradley Botkin <bradley_botkin@wgbh.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 13:01:25 +0000
- To: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
- CC: "public-texttracks@w3.org" <public-texttracks@w3.org>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
> On May 17, 2016, at 1:27 PM, David Singer <singer@mac.com> wrote: > > >> On May 17, 2016, at 5:24 , Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: >> >> >> Hello Brad! STYLE is not yet implemented, that's why it doesn't work. :-) Please file issues for browsers asking to implement it. If it isn't implemented it will eventually be removed from the specification. >> > > Yes, this is fairly recent work: for the W3C document, probably 1.1 rather than 1.0. For a living standard, well, it’s a balance between demand and implementation (and how long one waits between the former and the latter). > > Dave Singer > > singer@mac.com > Hi Dave, I understand the balance. If the working group doesn’t feel the need to support external caption/subtitle/AD vendors then there’s probably no need to any further with STYLE support since private web ecosystems have access to the underlying html/css/javascript and can support text ornamentation however they like. But if the target vendor audience includes external organizations, then it might help for the group to develop a short standard test VTT file which exercises a minimum set of features which would be necessary to satisfy, for example, a subset of 608/708 requirements (let’s say font face, font size, fore/background color, bold/italic/underline). Support for such a file might be said to satisfy the minimum requirements for “VTT support”. Or something. Cheers, —Brad
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2016 13:01:57 UTC