InterScribe · Practical event resources
Replay and transcript handoff kit
Review a fictional timing edit, check speaker and sound information, and document exactly which recording and text files are approved for release.
Worksheet revision: October 12, 2026 · Free to use without an account
1. Keep raw export and reviewed release separate
A transcript is useful for searching or reading; a replay caption track must also match the released video. Save the original export as a source, label a working copy for review and name the approved release artifact distinctly. Changing a vocabulary later does not repair files already downloaded or distributed.
| Artifact | What the reviewer checks | Status / owner |
|---|---|---|
| Raw transcript export | Preserve source identity; do not label it reviewed. | |
| Reviewed transcript | Meaning, speaker attribution, terms and necessary context. | |
| Replay caption track | Text plus timing against the exact release video. | |
| Release recording | Edits, version, player and associated text files match. |
2. Work through a fictional SRT timing change
This invented example illustrates timing, not a real event or a complete caption style standard. The original source video contains a five-second opening slate. Two source cues are:
1 00:00:10,000 --> 00:00:12,500 MAYA: We begin at six, not seven. 2 00:00:13,000 --> 00:00:15,000 [Door closes] Please use the side entrance.
If the editor removes exactly the first five seconds and makes no other cuts, these candidate times shift five seconds earlier:
1 00:00:05,000 --> 00:00:07,500 MAYA: We begin at six, not seven. 2 00:00:08,000 --> 00:00:10,000 [Door closes] Please use the side entrance.
Play both cues with the edited video to confirm the alignment and reading experience. A later cut inside the programme requires another timing review; one global offset will not necessarily fix every cue. Preserve the negative “not” and verify who is speaking. Include a sound description only when it is accurate and useful to understanding the scene. This sample does not prove that a chosen player accepts or displays every feature of the file.
3. Review what a listener would otherwise hear
- Compare the text with the recording, including names, numbers, conditions and negatives.
- Identify speakers where needed for understanding; do not infer an identity you cannot verify.
- Review meaningful non-speech audio, such as a relevant alarm or laughter affecting the message. Avoid adding irrelevant sounds merely to fill a checklist.
- Keep quotations and specialized terms consistent with the approved source; escalate uncertain meaning.
- For translated material, arrange competent target-language review. Fluent-looking text alone is not evidence of faithful meaning.
- Check line breaks, reading pace and cue changes in the actual destination player. Review overlaps, omissions and any edits near cuts.
- Confirm permission, audience scope and any necessary redaction with the responsible owner before distribution.
4. Complete the release manifest
Record filenames and versions explicitly. “Final captions” is ambiguous if several people have a different file with that name. The fictional naming
pattern lecture-v2-reviewed-en.srt identifies a release relationship, but it still needs the checks below.
| Release item | Exact filename / version / location | Reviewer / date / status |
|---|---|---|
| Released video | ||
| Raw export retained separately | ||
| Reviewed transcript | ||
| Reviewed caption track and language | ||
| Destination player check |
Choose a clear status for each item: raw, in review, approved or withheld. Test from the intended viewer’s access context, not only the administrator’s preview. Confirm that the selected track belongs to the released video and that the transcript download opens.
If a material error is found after release, identify which recording and text versions are affected, review the correction and replace the relevant distribution copies. Keep a short change note so the next reviewer can tell what was corrected.