2009-03-04 15:04:03: Created issue 'Should we pre-define some track names?' nickname nessy owned by Silvia Pfeiffer on product , description 'Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Mar/0008.html
We can consider it is up to the container format to define the track names. We could recommend that there be a naming scheme such as video ... video[n] and audio ... audio[n] to address multiple a/v tracks, maybe even text ... text[n]. But I don't think they make much sense - it would be better the names chosen had some semantic meaning, such as "video", "sign-language", "audio", "music", "speech", "sound-effects", "audio annotations", "subtitles-en", subtitles-de", "karaoke-en", "lyrics" etc.
And .. yes, at some point somebody should have some standard names for these - in particular for accessibility it would be nice to be able to say through the protocol "I want no audio tracks, but video and sign-language and all text tracks".
Maybe there is a scheme that we need to develop, where the codec type is also part of the naming, e.g. video.sign-language, audio.annotations, video.music etc. We haven't thought much about structure for describing tracks yet.' non-public [Raphaël Troncy]