- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:05:51 -0700
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, public-tt <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+dU0an6Zi65NmXkbdwXf7aQReaJryBFSR2U9E3X9O=dhA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer < > silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Glenn, >> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Travis Leithead < >>> travis.leithead@microsoft.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > From: Silvia Pfeiffer [mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com] >>>> > >>>> > I'm looking for feedback on this feature here. If there are no >>>> objections >>>> > and sufficient support for these features, I suggest adding them to >>>> the >>>> > HTML5.1 specification. >>>> >>>> I'm very cautious about immediately merging this feature back into >>>> HTML5.1. I believe the best course of action is to keep this feature >>>> separate from the HTML5.1 spec (as a stand-alone document) as it allows >>>> easier review, as well as time to get consensus and develop the proposal >>>> based on feedback. >>>> >>>> Given that there is some time elapsed between now and when you can get >>>> sufficient support, then I don't object to merging it in. I would prefer to >>>> have at least a month or two to have time to gather all the right people >>>> together, perform the review, summarize and submit (and have time for you >>>> to incorporate any feedback). >>>> >>>> Finally, just a quick "thank you" for putting this together. I really >>>> like that extension specs are starting to be developed and I want to >>>> encourage folks to continue to submit these and get them started as >>>> reviewable documents. >>>> >>> >>> A few questions of clarification: >>> >>> - does this rollup caption extension depend on >>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/text-tracks/raw-file/default/608toVTT/region.html? if the answer is yes, then these TextTrackRegion interface extensions >>> need to be renamed to WebVTTTextTrackRegion or otherwise made more generic >>> to accommodate use of TTML instead of WebVTT >>> >>> >> No, they don't depend on WebVTT. It's a generic concept that builds on >> CEA708 windows and should thus similarly be able to present TTML rollup >> captions. >> >> >>> >>> - does the mechanisms defined as extensions to the current HTML5 >>> TextTrack and related interface types take into account use of TTML instead >>> of WebVTT? if the answer is no, then it should be reviewed and modified as >>> needed to permit use of TTML as well, or at least support future >>> integration with TTML >>> >>> >> Yes, it does just as much as TextTrackCue also permits use of TTML. I >> actually mentioned that in my email, but maybe not explicitly enough. >> >> >>> >>> Overall, we need to keep in mind that TTML will be used by commercial >>> video content providers for captioning HTML5 media elements, >>> >> > > On a somewhat unrelated side note: while the industry is starting to use > TTML, only IE10 has released basic support for it in <track>. > I expect to see wider support for TTML in browsers in the relatively near future, and have started looking into adding support in WK. > In contrast, all browsers are implementing support for WebVTT (including > IE10). Since it's explicitly stated that TTML is created for *the purpose > of interchange among authoring systems*, while WebVTT is created for > rendering in browsers, it may be worthwhile to start creating a mapping > between TTML and WebVTT. I'd be happy to help. > To give a bit more context, TTML also states "In addition to being used for interchange among legacy distribution content formats, TTML content may be used directly as a distribution format" so it certainly isn't limited to authoring interchange. Given the recent FCC designation of TTML as a safe harbor format for caption delivery over the Internet, I expect its usage as a direct distribution format to increase. In any case, I support defining a mapping between TTML and WebVTT to the extent that is feasible. It would probably be useful to start with the TTML SDP-US profile published recently at [1]. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-ttml10-sdp-us-20130205/ > Since the WebVTT extension that we are pursuing in the Community Group > will introduce means for authoring rollup captions in WebVTT, and the > TextTrackRegion provides the rendering means in the browser, the region > feature should fill the gaps that previously existed for the FCC required > caption features and thus for TTML conversion. > I will suggest to the TTWG to review this work as well, as there may be some additional input coming from TTML applications of these interfaces. Perhaps we should start a new thread on <public-tt@w3.org> to pursue this further. Regards, Glenn
Received on Thursday, 21 February 2013 14:06:45 UTC