Skip to content

Wide Review Comment 2017: positioning with cue box vs region #376

Closed

Description

@nigelmegitt

Copy/paste from https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2017Sep/0080.html - raising as an issue for tracking/disposition purposes.

Two positioning and sizing constructs are defined: the cue box and the region. It is not clear in the data model section why both are needed and how a cue box is supposed to interact with a region. Indeed it appears that they are independent constructs given that only cue's position (and none of the other attributes) relates to or depends on the region. The cue box size is relative to the video viewport, not the region. This means that the concept of a region is not a "bounding box" within which cue text is rendered, but is only an alternative positioning reference. That semantic definition differs from other specifications that define regions, including TTWG's other specification covering this use case, TTML. (as Chair, I would prefer that there be semantic alignment here between the working group's specifications, and given the history and current state, that would mean modifying the treatment of regions in WebVTT.)

Activity

  1. added this to the WD-wide-review milestone on Oct 1, 2017
  2. silviapfeiffer commented on Oct 28, 2017

    @silviapfeiffer
    Member

    The region is definitely a bounding box within which cues are rendered. I've clarified that in the patch.

    About the cue box size: 4.4 explains that if the cue has a "vertical", "line" or "size" setting, the cue drops out of the region. Otherwise, the cue's width is calculated to be relative to the region width rather than the viewport. I've added some clarifying text.

  3. silviapfeiffer commented on Nov 11, 2017

    @silviapfeiffer
    Member

    add this also to cue box explanation in #383

  4. added a commit that references this issue on Nov 11, 2017
  5. silviapfeiffer commented on Nov 11, 2017

    @silviapfeiffer
    Member

    Please review this patch as well as the patch at #383

  6. nigelmegitt commented on Feb 14, 2018

    @nigelmegitt
    ContributorAuthor

    Noting that I approved the patches already, marking as commenter agreed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions