On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Julian Reschke <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 12.08.2010 10:09, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > >> ... >> >> The core "problem" is that WebSRT is far too compatible with existing SRT >> usage. Regardless of the file extension and MIME type used, it's quite >> improbable that anyone will have different parsers for the same format. Once >> media players have been forced to handle the extra markup in WebSRT (e.g. by >> ignoring it, as many already do) the two formats will be the same, and using >> WebSRT markup in .srt files will just work, so that's what people will do. >> We may avoid being seen as arrogant format-hijackers, but the end result is >> two extensions and two different MIME types that mean exactly the same >> thing. >> > > ... > > (just observing...) > > So when something that used to be plain text now carries markup, what's the > compatibility story for plain text that happens to contain markup > characters, such as "<", ">" or "&"? > > Best regards, Julian > I assume you mean: what happens to text that contains such characters? In most SRT systems, such stuff will just be displayed verbatim. Cheers, Silvia.
