From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
WikiProject Disability (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon SubRip is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


Please reaad this external link when the spam blacklist allows it (remove FOO):

* [ ZuGGy's website]

--Apoc2400 04:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Who blacklisted this?!? I filed a request for removal (how do I wikilink to wm?)-- 23:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Compatibility table[edit]

Propose adding compatibility table, unless that's better done somewhere else.

==.SRT Compatibility==
  • Windows Media Player 9,6.4,Media Player Classic respects all but <b>, shows correct sub during and after seek.
  • VLC 0.86a - does not respect any basic html code. Dumps <font color="#ffff00">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
--Lexein 13:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

original website[edit]

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)

The original website still exists: I changed the link. (talk) 14:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Good - it was all ads for a while. That was weird. --Lexein (talk) 13:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


Would it be possible to add some type of metadata where for eg. the srt file's language would be defined? Once this enhancement is available, players will be able to pick it up in their menu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

You can do this by naming the subtitle the same as the as the avi + .language. e.g:
DirectVobsub (Windows) and SMPlayer (Linux) will show the language in their menu. (talk) 18:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
You could also mux the subtitles into whatever container the video and audio are in. Matroshka will let you add a name and language as metadata to the subtitle tracks. MKVToolnix would work. (talk) 02:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

What encoding?[edit]

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 (talkcontribs) 13:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

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. (talk) 02:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
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.-- (talk) 09:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


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

Relisting for deletion[edit]

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)

Cease decimation[edit]

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)

split article[edit]

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


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)


Thanks for adding the info about WebSRT; pondering what to do with it. One "spec" page [1], a personal webpage) says it is "widely (broadly? roughly?) based on SubRip" (this makes it a derivative) but the other source [2] 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?

  1. I've subsectioned it, entitled WebSRT, because "Derivative" and "Offshoot" didn't seem correct.
  2. "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."
  3. "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)

The WebSRT section is no longer accurate. "WebSRT" was never used in the wild and is now dead, it was only one of these formats that Mr Hickson pulls out of his ass from time to time because he wants to be the ruler of the universe and wouldn't accept a format specd by other people. It was never compatible with SRT anyway, not even with a subset. A subset of "WebSRT" might have been compatible with a subset of SRT, but that is meaningless. Then "the industry" told him that they don't want a web standard with a name that could be associated with ripping (= pirates). So he renamed it to WebVTT[3] now and what has become of it has little resemblance with SRT. Please note that WebVTT is not a W3C standard or draft. The W3C draft HTML5 spec does not determine a concrete format for a subtitles <track>, WebVTT is only used as an example. (But strangely, the track element also lacks a mimetype attribute that would allow to specify the used format).-- (talk) 14:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Unsourced text styling details[edit]

"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.


3 00:00:30:500 --> 00:00:46,100 <i>1. Shows text italic</i> <b>2. Shows text bold</b> <u>3. Shows text underlined</u> 4. <u>Combinations<u/> <b>are<b/> <i>possible<i/>.
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)

There is also the <font color="#rrggbb"> 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.-- (talk) 14:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

specification question[edit]

"Subtitle number" - must be in order or not? Does duplicates allowed?

"Text of subtitle (one or more lines)" - Does blank lines allowed or single blank line is end of section and other may be ignored? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 19:35, 27 May 2012‎

I haven't seen any misbehavior caused by duplicate numbers. Most subtitle editors provide automatic renumbering.
Exactly one blank (empty) line terminates the text, and marks the end of the section. (Some old players misbehave with more than one blank line between sections.) --Lexein (talk) 20:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm just going to guess that the numbering depends on what order the captions will be shown. This can help for overlapping times,
which would be common if you want multiple captions to be displayed at different locations but at the same time on the screen.
But it is good practice not to have Sub1 be 00:00:15,000 --> 00:00:17,000 and Sub2 be 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:13,000. (talk) 04:49, 30 January 2014 (UTC)


What does the extention stand for? Is it "seret" ("film", literally "tape", in Hebrew)? (talk) 12:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

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)


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)

File format RS[edit]

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)

Source problems[edit]

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)

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)
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)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The 3O posting has been removed. You need to present a thorough discussion and reach a standstill. – S. Rich (talk) 05:02, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

  • There's no requirement for a "standstill" in 3O; in fact, "any user may invoke dispute resolution at any time to resolve a dispute". I must say, though, that I saw this standstill coming a mile away. It's the same old "useful" (argument to avoid) vs "RS" (policy) argument, which bores me. My points are all quite valid and defensible, and do not require repetition. If you don't have the will or ability to form an opinion, leave the 3O request up for others to see. You are not in any position to try to force other editors to go through the motions of repetitive discussion for your entertainment. I'll be rerequesting 3O now. --Lexein (talk) 00:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)

Ill-founded deletion of cited content[edit]

Cease decimation. There is no logical reason to delete long-standing cited content, from sources which have become RS. Historically, was written by the same folks at, which became CoreCodec Inc. So, no need to pretend the source is not reliable. --Lexein (talk) 04:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 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)
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)

Format error (small)[edit]

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. (talk) 04:50, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Lexein (talk) 14:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Mimetype of WebVTT?[edit]

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

Can we add details on the SRT positioning details?[edit]

Given no site details the Delphi source as a SRT specification can we add them here?

subtile number

00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:00,000 X1:000 X2:000 Y1:000 Y2:000
  start time      stop time   rectangle left right top bottom

per the original Delphi source provided via the article linked homepage:

AddLine(IntToStr(WNumSub + Form13.SpinEditSubRipOffset.Value - TxtFile.SplitIndex));
StCtrl := Unit07.TCmsToStr(TmpSub.StartTC) + ' --> ' + Unit07.TCmsToStr(TmpSub.StopTC)

if Form13.OutPut.SubRip.Extended or
      (TxtFile.OutputFormat = OFIAuthor) then
      StCtrl := StCtrl + Tnt_WideFormat('  X1:%.3d X2:%.3d Y1:%.3d Y2:%.3d',
        [TmpSub.Coord.Left, TmpSub.Coord.Right,
        TmpSub.Coord.Top, TmpSub.Coord.Bottom]);


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)

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)