Clément Bœsch <u <at> pkh.me> writes: > > Carl Eugen Hoyos <cehoyos <at> ag.or.at> writes: > > > > > Clément Bœsch <u <at> pkh.me> writes: > > > > > > > > + text->linebreaks = "<br/>"; > > > > > > > > i'm afraid this won't be enough to support > > > > "<br>", "<BR>", "<br />", ... > > > > > > I only looked at the sample we have, are they > > > all valid line breaks? > > > > Ping, I don't understand your comment. > > There is nothing to understand: is it explicit in a > specs somewhere that the only markup is a line return > expressed by the specific string "<br/>", or it's > just another HTML-based markup, where "<br>", "<BR>", > "<br />" can happen?
Why do you assume that any other tags than <br/> exist? For how many codecs did we see specifications at the time they were implemented? I was testing a sample and this is the only feature missing that I can see. > You are the one implementing this, don't ask me about > the details. I'm just wondering about the amount of > work it will require to remove that code before > implementing it correctly if necessary. I am just testing existing samples, if you have more samples or know where I can find more samples, please tell me. > The main point being that I'm wondering how we are > going to explain to our users that we support > subtitles with "<br/>", but supporting "<br />" will > require large changes. While I don't understand this argument at all, I don't think speculating about samples that we don't have any reason to believe they exist makes much sense. > Note: there is a work in progress on the mailing list > about factoring out the HTML code from codecs, which > includes the support of "br" based tags; it might > make more sense then to change the codec to SubRip > (because it will support that tag) instead of adding > a half-assed codec that will be deprecated soon. Which thread is this? Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
