[whatwg] On implementing videos with multiple tracks in HTML5
silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 30 21:38:25 PDT 2012
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>> Three issues I have taken out of this discussion that I think are still
>> open to discuss and potentially define in the spec:
>> * How to expose in-band extra audio and video tracks from a multi-track
>> media resource to the Web browser? I am particularly thinking here about
>> the use cases Lachlan mentioned: offering stereo and surround sound
>> alternatives, audio descriptions, audio commentaries or multiple
>> languages, and would like to add sign language tracks to this list. This
>> is important to solve now, since it will allow the use of audio
>> descriptions and sign language, two important accessibility
> I think this is now resolved. Let me know if there's still something open
Ha, yes! 21 months later and it's indeed solved through the same
mechanism that synchronisation of multiple audio/video tracks is
>> * How to associate and expose such extra audio and video tracks that are
>> provided out-of-band to the Web browser? This is probably a next-version
>> issue since it's rather difficult to implement in the browser. It
>> improves on meeting accessibility needs, but it doesn't stand in the way
>> of providing audio descriptions and sign language - just makes it easier
>> to use them.
> I'm not sure what you mean here.
It was the difference between in-band tracks and separate files. Also
solved by now.
>> * Whether to include a multiplexed download functionality in browsers
>> for media resources, where the browser would do the multiplexing of the
>> active media resource with all the active text, audio and video tracks?
>> This could be a context menu functionality, so is probably not so much a
>> need to include in the HTML5 spec, but it's something that browsers can
>> consider to provide. And since muxing isn't quite as difficult a
>> functionality as e.g. decoding video, it could actually be fairly cheap
>> to implement.
> I agree that this seems out of scope for the spec.
Thread closed. :-)
More information about the whatwg