- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:58:05 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com>
- cc: "GLWAI Guidelines WG (GL - WAI Guidelines WG)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Larry Goldberg <larry_goldberg@wgbh.org>, <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>
Chas, there are many use cases where the captions aren't the same length as the content, or where it is desirable to pause the rest of the presentation - this is also the case in audio-described content, where it takes extra time to put in the audio descriptions. SMIL 2 was designed to handle these cases better in various ways. For example, it is possible to have audio descriptions (for example) which, if they are played, force the presentation to wait at key points (this is related to the way that it controls synchronisation failure, but also to some more purpose-designed functions it introduces). Of course there are other cases where this is not desirable. Enabling a user to choose between slowing the overall presentation, and keeping it running in real time, is a nice choice to have when people are getting a live transmission. The technology exists (not just in SMIL, but also with conventional TV) for making this choice at multiple points, and going from one mode to the other by various means (fast-forward through buffered content, or just jump to current real-time point, or ...) cheers Charles McCN On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Charles F. Munat wrote: Why do captioned objects need to be the same length as uncaptioned objects? Why wouldn't it be possible (and even desirable) to allow captioned versions to pause the audiovisual long enough for caption readers to catch up? Just wondering. Chas. Munat
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2001 21:58:19 UTC