Re: using Kate for WebVTT encapsulation

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Chris Pearce <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> On 12/04/2011 12:44 p.m., Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>
>> OggK, you've probably seen that the bug in Firefox for adding Kate
>> support has been closed as WONTFIX:
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=481529
>>
>> I've just posted a reply there mentioning how I envisage in-band
>> WebVTT support to be provided through Kate. I want to ask your
>> opinion.
>>
>
> From our point of view, once we've implemented out-of-band WebVTT support,
> authors will have subtitle support, and so any additional in-band subtitle
> track in Ogg would be redundant.
>
> If we supported WebVTT in Kate (or some other in-band Ogg track) we'd
> increase our maintenance burden. Whereas if we only implement WebVTT support
> inside a <track> element, we can share that implementation between WebM and
> Ogg.

Hi Chris,

MPEG4 already has in-band text tracks, which at least Safari, but
probably also IE are going to decode into TextTrack objects.
WebM is going to have in-band text tracks with WebVTT. I'm pretty sure
that it will be supported at least in Chrome.

I think it makes sense for Ogg to at least have a mapping. Then you
can make the decision for in-band support in Firefox both for Ogg and
WebM at a later stage.

Cheers,
Silvia.