- From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 14:10:10 +0200
- To: Bob Lund <B.Lund@cablelabs.com>
- Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, WHAT Working Group Mailing List <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Bob Lund <B.Lund@cablelabs.com> wrote: > > > On 10/22/14, 9:01 AM, "Philip Jägenstedt" <philipj@opera.com> wrote: > >>On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer >><silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> In the Inband Text Tracks Community Group we've recently had a >>> discussion about a proposal by HbbTV. I'd like to bring it up here to >>> get some opinions on how to resolve the issue. >>> >>> (The discussion thread is at >>> >>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-inbandtracks/2014Sep/0008.html >>> , but let me summarize it here, because it's a bit spread out.) >>> >>> The proposed use case is as follows: >>> * there are MPEG-2 files that have an audio, a video and several >>>caption tracks >>> * the caption tracks are not in WebVTT format but in formats that >>> existing Digital TV receivers are already capable of decoding and >>> displaying (e.g. CEA708, DVB-T, DVB-S, TTML) >>> * there is no intention to standardize a TextTrackCue format for those >>> other formats (statements are: there are too many formats to deal >>> with, a set-top-box won't need access to cues) >>> >>> The request was to expose such caption tracks as textTracks: >>> interface HTMLMediaElement : HTMLElement { >>> ... >>> readonly attribute TextTrackList textTracks; >>> ... >>> } >>> >>> Then, the TextTrack interface would list them as a kind="captions", >>> but without any cues, since they're not exposed. This then allows >>> turning the caption tracks on/off via JavaScript. However, for >>> JavaScript it is indistinguishable from a text track that has no >>> captions. So the suggestion was to introduce a new kind="UARendered". >>> >>> >>> My suggestion was to instead treat such tracks as burnt-in video >>> tracks (by combination with the main video track): >>> interface HTMLMediaElement : HTMLElement { >>> ... >>> >>> readonly attribute VideoTrackList videoTracks; >>> ... >>> } >>> >>> Using the VideoTrack interface it would list them as a kind="captions" >>> and would thus also be able to be activated by JavaScript. The >>> downside would that if you have N video tracks and m caption tracks in >>> the media file, you'd have to expose NxM videoTracks in the interface. >>> >>> >>> So, given this, should we introduce a kind="UARendered" or expose such >>> tracks a videoTracks or is there another solution that we're >>> overlooking? >> >>VideoTrackList can have at most one video track selected at a time, so >>representing this as a VideoTrack would require some additional >>tweaking to the model. >> >>A separate text track kind seems better, but wouldn't it still be >>useful to distinguish between captions and subtitles even if the >>underlying data is unavailable? > > This issue was clarified here [1]. TextTrack.mode would be set > ³uarendered². TextTrack.kind would still reflect ³captions² or ³subtitles². > > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2014Oct/0154.html Oops, I missed that. I was under the impression that the ability for scripts to detect this situation was the motivation for a spec change. If there are multiple tracks most likely all but one will be "disabled" initially, which would be indistinguishable from a disabled track with no cues. Since TextTrack.mode is mutable, even when it is initially "uarendered", scripts would have to remember that before disabling the track, which seems a bit inconvenient. P.S. Your mails have an encoding problem resulting in superscript numbers instead of quotes. Philip
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2014 12:10:35 UTC