Talk:SubRip

message: Please reaad this external link when the spam blacklist allows it (remove FOO):
* ZuGGy's website
--Apoc2400 04:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who blacklisted this?!? I filed a request for removal (how do I wikilink to wm?)--87.162.14.52 23:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spam

message: Propose adding compatibility table, unless that's better done somewhere else.
:==.SRT Compatibility==
:===Windows===
:*Windows Media Player 9,6.4,Media Player Classic respects all but , shows correct sub during and after seek.
:*VLC 0.86a - does not respect any basic html code. Dumps tags to screen. Retains current sub (does not update) during seek, times out correctly.  After seek, updates at start of next sub.
:*TCPMP 0.72RC1 shows no subs
:===Linux===
:===OSX===
:--Lexein 13:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Compatibility table

message: True that the original website is now ads, so I added back an archive of the original website for historical context. --Lexein 08:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The original website still exists: http://membres.lycos.fr/subrip/. I changed the link. 84.192.54.66 (talk) 14:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good - it was all ads for a while.  That was weird. --Lexein (talk) 13:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: original website

message: This crucial information is missing from the article. I have not been able to locate any information on what character encoding the .srt format dictates. UTF-8 would be the sane choice, but seeing how this information seems to lack everywhere I look, one could fear that the .srt format does not dictate any specific encoding at all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joachim Michaelis (talk • contribs) 13:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for the record (I realize this was posted 10 months ago): I don't think any encoding is "dictated", but ANSI is used by default if there are no non-latin characters, but you're free (and prompted to when non-latin characters are encountered) to select a different encoding. 78.34.126.145 (talk) 02:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For SRT streams in Matroska, UTF-8 is required. To avoid mojibake, it is highly recommendable to use UTF-8 for all files that contain non-US-ASCII (not just non-latin) characters. There is really no need for ANSI codepages anymore. Let's be glad that we have Unicode now. UTF-8 seems to be the only Unicode encoding that is recognized across players, but be sure to include a BOM at the beginning of the file.--94.222.212.51 (talk) 09:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: What encoding?

message: Python code? WTF  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.220.0.226 (talk) 14:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: mmmm

message: There are serious issues with this article that have not been corrected since the initial AFD posting back in November.  If they cannot be resolved I will be relisting this for deletion next month.  Thanks,  JBsupreme (talk) 08:06, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Relisting for deletion

message: There are two easy to find WP:SECONDARY book sources.  
* One shows multiple examples of the SubRIP file format in use, so I'm restoring the example of SubRIP format sans positioning parameters.  
* One cites the Zuggy SubRip website and provides screenshots and SubRip explanations.  The zuggy site, its News and Guide pages have all been stable for at least 5 years, and should now be considered a stable source of status info about SubRip development. It's certainly not a forum and not a blog...
These resolve the "original research"  and "no encyclopedic sources" tags.
--Lexein (talk) 13:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cease decimation

message: into software and file format/extension  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.44.155.36 (talk) 00:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  split article 

message: Subrip-compatible hardware home video player here,  
reviewed here and in CNET Asia here
Any other hardware which can use SubRip files?
Maybe these "Best Buy Easy Home DVD VX!, Kiss DP-500, Neuston Maestro DVX-1201, Liteon LVD-1201, Rimax Multiplayer DivX, DVD-X4 Waitec Woxter XDIV 500" per
Here archived short & long English tr.
--Lexein (talk) 02:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hardware 

message: Thanks for adding the info about WebSRT; pondering what to do with it.  One "spec" page , a personal webpage) says it is "widely (broadly? roughly?) based on SubRip" (this makes it a derivative) but the other source  says nothing about SubRip whatsoever, and proclaims that WebSRT stands for: "Web Subtitle Resource Tracks", again not mentioning SubRip (this makes it unrelated, and unintended to be safely parse-able by existing SubRip SRT handlers.  This is an unfortunate state of affairs. For those with long memories, hark back to Microsoft's strategy of "embrace, extend and extinguish".  SubRip was indeed ad hoc, and non-sanctioned; nevertheless it is widely used, coded to, and supported by every single player, soft or hard, which supports _any_ text subtitle format files.  So, what to do here in this article? 
#I've subsectioned it, entitled WebSRT, because "Derivative" and "Offshoot" didn't seem correct.
#"based on a subset" - Only one source said so, and it said "widely based". Given that the writer may not be a native English speaker, perhaps they meant "broadly based."
#"subset" depends on how you define "subset". If I'm reading the parse flow correctly, no part of SubRip will play in WebSRT, and no part of WebSRT will play on any existing SubRip .SRT-compatible player, without visibly distracting "text spew". So these are mutually disjoint subsets, as implemented.  This may be addressed in lex/parse later, but...  Discuss? --Lexein (talk) 00:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WebSRT 

message: "We" as subtitlers know that these styling tags exist. And we know that they are supported in some players, but not all.  But this is all original research because there are no reliable sources, primary (author) or secondary(books magazines) which support the definition or even the existence of these styling tags.   I've only ever seen one forum post which supports their existence. So I've moved them here for discussion and "parking" until they are sourced.
::normal
::bold
::italic
::underline
 3
 00:00:30:500 --> 00:00:46,100
 1. Shows text italic
 2. Shows text bold
 3. Shows text underlined
 4. Combinations are possible.
Will result in:
 Altocumulus clouds occur between six thousand
  
 and twenty thousand feet above ground level.
  
 1. Shows text italic
 2. Shows text bold
 3. Shows text underlined
 4. Combinations are possible.
--Lexein (talk) 15:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also the  tag and the position code X1:... Y1:... X2:... Y2:... (in pixels) after the timecodes. Most software also recognizes MicroDVD-style formatting in curly braces. HTML-style tags do not need to be closed, they will be closed implicitly at the end of the line. Or at the end of the subtitle? Is "0" as a subtitle number allowed? Must they be in order? Can subtitles contain no lines or empty lines? LF or CRLF or both? What about Unicode RTL codes? What about HTML entities? What whitespace is allowed between timecodes? Must the microseconds be exactly three digits after the comma? Are < > allowed outside of tags (sometimes used as speaker cues) and what is the algorithm for parsing them? Apparently nothing has changed since 2004. SRT is like RSS, everybody uses it, nobody knows for sure what it should look like.--88.73.41.59 (talk) 14:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced text styling details 

message: What does the extention stand for? Is it "seret" ("film", literally "tape", in Hebrew)?
77.125.106.32 (talk) 12:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it is merely an initialism for "SubRip Text", but that's WP:OR, based on the source code and Zuggy's website. --Lexein (talk) 21:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  etymology 

message: In this edit, I've sourced a non-controversial example from a 2012 book. The example is from the Creative Commons-licensed film Elephant's Dream. Now let's stop all the edit warring over the example, forever, hmmm? That'll be great. --Lexein (talk) 15:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example 

message: It's very tempting to add stuff we "know" is true about the advanced internals of the .SRT format, but we have to stick with what can be reliably sourced. The Matroska doc and the Xiao&Wang article are the only RS I've found, and they only mention the basics: no styling, and no positioning. Not even Zuggy's site mentions the advanced features. --Lexein (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  File format RS 

message: We don't cite "C" sourcecode in refs about subjects which are not related to the language itself. We don't claim things not written in the cited sources: we don't put words in source's mouths. We don't use dubious sources like personal web pages by non-notable authors. --Lexein (talk) 03:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: SubRip is from a long dead program who's creator never documented it's output format, so sources that have been used are based on that programs source code or output which makes the source invalid.  Such as the matroska site source.  this would mean that only the WebVTT structure should be the only thing documented here as it's the only one that can be cited by a source.Helmboy (talk) 04:06, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You were bold, I reverted and amended, now we discuss, per WP:BRD. Long dead? False. WebVTT? False. You've been allowed to run unchecked through this article for too long. Now you have my full attention. Most of what you've been adding has abused sources, cited no source, put words in source's mouths, or cited unreliable sources, and generally damaged the verifiability against reliable sources of this article. Please stop damaging other editor's attempts to put sense, and verifiability back into this article. I'm taking it to WP:Third opinion, so please don't revert again before that request is answered here. If you want to make the table frame invisible, I would agree with that, but not separating the example from a "key". There's just no need for a "key", since the previous paragraph explains everything to follow. --Lexein (talk) 04:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

text:  The original program IS long dead with the revived version barely updated with still NO cite-able documentation.  Unlike WebVTT which has a fully quotable source on the W3C site.  And if you mean run rampant by trying to expand a woefully incomplete article then I'm guilty.  As for the table, it should be a structured sample with key as template lead into the examples.  PS, the extremely restrictive types of sources aloud to be used will keep this article from ever be useful.  PPS, I didn't realize this article was your turf war.Helmboy (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Your repetitive statements, not based on policy or guideline, are noted. Your opinion about the appearance of the table is also noted, and may be acted on per help:Table. Your abusive, false accusation of "turf war" is wildly inappropriate, and is evidence that you do not seem to understand how to actually improve articles,  or how to protect articles from damage by poorly sourced claims. Wikipedia is not the repository of all unsourced, trivial, or irrelevant things about expansions and derivations of SubRip. SubRip has nothing to do with WebVTT, except as inspiration, and any forcing of expanded coverage of WebVTT is, bluntly, wp:Coatracking. Finally, the age of SubRip is irrelevant, and is no excuse for pouring in unsupported or poorly sourced claims about expansions of it. Decent sources continue to appear, such as books - you even cited additional info in one of the book sources I found. Just stick with what actually published reliable sources actually say about the actual subject of this article, and leave out the rest. --Lexein (talk) 00:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the Third Opinion request a second (or is it third?) time, this time for being stale. There's only a limited list of folks who offer 3O's and when none of them have chosen to take this during that period of time, it's very likely not ever going to happen. Consider moving on to either a request at WP:DRN (though I wouldn't be at all surprised if no one takes it there, either, the volunteer pools for those two forums substantially overlap) or, perhaps better, making a request for comments to let the entire community weigh in. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source problems 

message: Cease decimation. There is no logical reason to delete long-standing cited content, from sources which have become RS. Historically, Matroska.org was written by the same folks at Corecodec.org, which became CoreCodec Inc. So, no need to pretend the source is not reliable. --Lexein (talk) 04:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  matroska.org cites only how it reads SRT files, it is NOT a spec.  Calling the section a name such as Specification implies it is a full spec when it is not.  Either remove the section or rename it to something like MKV implementation.  If you want to allow source code as a reference then you can add in positioning and call it 'Specification.Helmboy (talk) 05:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Has that been your complaint this whole time? So change the section name to Description or Format, then. Wikipedia is not the place for deep detailed specifications in any case. There's no basis for naming the section Matroska or MKV; your fight about the section name is not with me. That's just uncooperative and WP:OWN behavior, and you should knock it off. Until there's a wide consensus that software source code is an acceptable reliable source for claims made about software behavior or appearance, I won't be agreeing with its use as a source for specs. Finally, WebVTT really has very little place here, except as its (former) minimal mention, since it's entirely incompatible with .SRT, and is not generated by SubRip. --Lexein (talk) 06:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ill-founded deletion of cited content 

message: At the section marked as "plain", the timing is shown in a way that may be misleading in some ways. I do understand that Wikipedia is not a "how-to" place. But I think that changing the times so that they are ordered correctly may help the article look slightly less "sloppy".
I suggest just changing the first time from "00:03:10,500" to "00:00:10,500" just so that it doesn't look weird and matches up correctly with the box beneath it.
Like I said, this is a very minuscule typo, but I think it is never too small to fix properly.
71.211.189.108 (talk) 04:50, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: --Lexein (talk) 14:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format error (small) 

message: The article lacks the mimetype of WebVTT. Only the file extension is given. 87.78.129.79 (talk) 07:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mimetype of WebVTT? 

message: I noticed the WebVTT section really should have it's own page. Although SubRip does implement that standard, many other modern browsers do. Moving the section to another page could also allow the addition of more information such as supported browsers, websites, and so forth. The length of this section is out of proportion to the rest of the article. While removing the section would significantly shorten and already brief article, doing so would allow the article to become more focused and possibly even encourage users to add more information to this specific article.
While one standard is derived from Subrip, the two are not compatible. They are separate and deserve different articles.
Skylion007 (talk) 14:57, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: compatibility is dependent on how the parser is written.  given both use --> to sync to a frame and both use the use the same basic timestamps, there is no reason why a SRT parser could not be modified to support the still in development and badly derived WebVTT. Also since the WebVTT developers made so many pointless changes, they should have just used the already developed TTML format instead. helmboy 23:29, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Support: I despise any embrace, extend and extinguish strategies, no matter if it's MicroSoft, the W3C, or some FOSS standard. As long as SRT implementations not supporting WEBVTT are alive and kicking, e.g., does this affect the Wikimedia Commons TimedText namespace for media on commons? –Be..anyone (talk) 13:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 

message: The SubRip .srt file format really only supports the Microsoft Windows text encoding default of UTF-8 (commonly, but incorrectly, referred to as ANSI). That's obviously bullshit. Either you want UTF-16LE (little endian Unicode in 16bits), as opposed to UTF-8, and no "ANSI" blurb, or you want windows-1252 (Latin-1 + 26 additional glyphs not limited to the Euro) keeping the "ANSI" blurb. UTF-8 is never referred to as ANSI, not even incorrectly. 2A03:2267:0:0:8C3F:CFD0:8C:E0C5 (talk) 02:05, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Locked page at nonsense state 

message: שלום אני יעל, סטודנטית לתואר שני בחינוך מתמטי במכללה האקדמית אחוה.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.168.6.66 (talk) 08:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2016 

message: 45.118.70.70 (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Not an edit request. WP:NOTFORUM Cannolis (talk) 23:50, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 September 2016 

message: It's not the greatest of sources, but the video in this Vimeo blog post talks about the SRT format between 03:58 and 5:09.  (One relevant quote: "An SRT, or SubRip Subtitle file, is a universally compatible text file that contains timecode indexed text corresponding to speech, dialogue, sound effects, and other significant audio in an on screen video file.")  I'm not sure quite how it'd be used in the article, but it at least is another example of the ubiquity of the format. --Pokechu22 (talk) 23:14, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional source 

message: http://zuggy.wz.cz/ is not the right site Jidanni (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not the right website 

message: Man study wicked duc sah gat cii pet, Opp boy dugal sah kerr sun nukey sah ndey dunfi gan cii ken. Oii trust me bare just like gegain, man f the place still steady sticking, no how can trust these Fed's, off the hook if they ain't keeping it real get smoke no they ain't never been in the pen. 212.60.71.127 (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wicked