Recently, a post i uploaded had a replacement, but the file that was originally uploaded had subtitles in WebVTT format, that are missing in the file it was replaced with.

Embedded subtitles aren't something we care about in files, we care about quality.

donovan_dmc said:
Embedded subtitles aren't something we care about in files, we care about quality.

I understand, but closed captions are useful for users who don't understand the language or have some kind of hearing impairment. Closed captions can be turned on or off by the user, that way, they don't bother users who don't need or want them. Besides helping mitigate language barriers and accessibility issues, closed captions sometimes contain information such as annotations, easter eggs, and other information.

Edit: Spelling fix.

electricitywolf said:
I understand, but closed captions are useful for users who don't understand the language or have some kind of hearing impairment. Closed captions can be turned on or off by the user, that way, they don't bother users who don't need or want them. Besides helping mitigate language barriers and accesibility issues, closed captions sometimes contain information such as annotations, easter eggs, and other information.

We aren't going to forsake video quality for closed captions. The point of e621 is to archive the highest quality available. We also aren't going to inspect the metadata of files just in case there might be something important within them. We're a visual first archive, the only part of the file we really care about is the visuals.

donovan_dmc said:
We aren't going to forsake video quality for closed captions. The point of e621 is to archive the highest quality available.

Well, the closed captions that were present in the file that i uploaded and was latter replaced were just 50.6 KiB plus a few extra KiB of container overhead and metadata, that is tiny in comparison to the rest of a 100 MiB file.

electricitywolf said:
Well, the closed captions that were present in the file that i uploaded and was latter replaced were just 50.6 KiB plus a few extra KiB of container overhead and metadata, that is tiny in comparison to the rest of a 100 MiB file.

I never mentioned anything about filesize. Filesize is irrelevant here. We aren't checking for or retaining closed captions because they are not a visual element we cater to. Them being on a video isn't going to make us not replace it.

donovan_dmc said:
Them being on a video isn't going to make us not replace it.

I'm not saying that low-quality videos should not be replaced, but rather, that closed captions should be preserved. Closed captions can be very easily transfered to a new file.

electricitywolf said:
I'm not saying that low-quality videos should not be replaced, but rather, that closed captions should be preserved. Closed captions can be very easily transfered to a new file.

Checking for metadata is a privilege of time janitors don't really have.

Is not a subtitle, by it's definition, a visual element?
Beyond that, given the presence of notes and their usage in translation, this seems like something that should be supported.

votp said:
Is not a subtitle, by it's definition, a visual element?
Beyond that, given the presence of notes and their usage in translation, this seems like something that should be supported.

It goes beyond being just a visual element. Without a special configuration you will never see them. I've listed why in topic #42429, and will be locking this topic to consolidate the two.