- From: geoff freed <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:10:58 -0500
- To: Johnb@screen.subtitling.com, public-tt@w3.org
2/6/2003 6:33:43 AM, Johnb@screen.subtitling.com wrote: >TCIn 01:03:28:18 TCOut 01:03:30:00 "Jack, je tenais à vous >prévenir." >TCIn 01:03:32:05 TCOut 01:03:35:10 "Elle va mal. Son état >s'est beaucoup aggravé. >TCIn 01:03:35:24 TCOut 01:03:38:04 "Je lui ai donné des >calmants." Between subtitles two and three, above, there's a pause of 14 frames. For such a short pause, I don't see a need to require an out time to erase the display . Instead, simply let the third subtitle replace the second. That's how many captioning agencies do it today, and it's a good model. Captions that are sequenced with tiny pauses between them cause the viewer to blink, and that's annoying. If you need to pause between captions-- e.g., if there's nobody speaking-- *then* erase the display with an out time. Otherwise it would be best to simply let the captions appear smoothly one after the other with no pause. Geoff Freed WGBH/NCAM > >Charles Wiltgen wrote: ><Snipped SMIL example> > >> (If people have scenarios that they'd like me to whip up solutions for >> using this timing model, please let me know!) > >OK, I'll bite: > >.... >.... > >Now an advert break occurs at 01:03:30:00 and lasts for five minutes. This >must be catered for. I.e. the TT must be able to refer to absolute external >timestamps (not 1 sec per sec 'real times'). Simlarly off times need to be >expressed wrt the program material, so even if specified as durations they >would be re-calculated by adding the duration to the TCIn value. > >regards > >John Birch > >The views and opinions expressed are the author's own and do not necessarily >reflect the views and opinions of Screen Subtitling Systems Limited. > >
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2003 09:14:09 UTC