- From: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@telecom-paristech.fr>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:19:22 +0200
- To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
Sylvia, Le 10/08/2011 11:46, Silvia Pfeiffer a écrit : > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Cyril Concolato > <cyril.concolato@telecom-paristech.fr> wrote: >> Hi Sylvia, >> >> Le 10/08/2011 02:38, Silvia Pfeiffer a écrit : >>> >>> I wonder if instead it might be worth analysing if we can come up with >>> a<track> kind that allows overlaying hyperlinkable regions onto the >>> video? >> >> Why wouldn't it be possible to have a track element point to some animated >> SVG file? > > The<track> element points to timed text, i.e. to a file that provides > text fragments along the timeline of the video. SVG is not suitable > for that use. The fact that the spec puts a restriction is one aspect. I would be happy to know the rationale for it. But I think such restriction however could be removed. From an implementation point of view, we've done it in GPAC [1], it perfectly makes sense to consider SVG as an additional track to a video/audio media. It can be used for subtitling (yet another format), animated graphics (think about dynamic and synchronized ads, ...), regions of interests (See for example [2]). > Just like you cannot put a SVG into a<audio> or<video> > element, you won't be able to put a SVG into a<track> element. That's a separate issue on which we could also argue. Regards, cyril [1] http://gpac.sf.net [2] http://biblio.telecom-paristech.fr/cgi-bin/download.cgi?id=10647 -- Cyril Concolato Maître de Conférences/Associate Professor Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group Telecom ParisTech 46 rue Barrault 75 013 Paris, France http://concolato.wp.institut-telecom.fr/
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2011 11:19:05 UTC