- From: Maik Merten <maikmerten@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:03:41 +0200
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis schrieb: > I'm a bit confused about why W3C's Timed Text Candidate Recommendation > hasn't been mentioned in this thread, especially given that Flash > objects are the VIDEO element's biggest "competitor" and Flash CS3's > closed captioning component supports Timed Text. I haven't used it > myself: is there some hideous disadvantage of Timed Text that makes it > fundamentally flawed? It is appears to be designed for use both with > subtitles and captions. > > Here's the link for the CR: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-ttaf1-dfxp-20061116/ Actually I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to have an attribute for media elements specifying a URI for a file containing Timed Text. These externally stored (not embedded in a media file) captions would be codec-agnostic and could be used to reuse the very same set of captions for e.g. differently encoded media (Ogg, MPEG, Generic-Codec-Of-The-Season, ...). As a side note I like the idea of captions which are more than just the usual stream text. Imagine a newsreel with timed "Would you like to know more?" links. Given that HTML5 is usually viewed in browsers that implement at least a non-empty subset of HTML I imagine it should be possible for the browser to layer something div-equivalent over the media elements supporting captioning and pipe the HTML captions into it (with caution, imagine a caption itself recursively embedding a video). Maik Merten
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2007 09:03:41 UTC