W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Issue 142: Video Poster (or, what's in a name?)

From: Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:03:04 -0800
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-Id: <61517984-6E50-4001-80B8-1D84E6FF1181@apple.com>
To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>
Hi Gregory -

On Jan 6, 2011, at 7:13 AM, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:

> my 2 cents (U.S.) on the "poster" controversy
> perhaps the biggest problem with "poster" is the attribute's name,, 
> "poster" -- if it is not meant to be viewed/rendered, why, then, 
> call it a "poster" -- seems that the semantic problem is strictly 
> with HTML5 and its inappropriate use of the word "poster" which 
> has caused us to loose valuable cycles debating over an error in 
> the HTML5 spec itself -- if it isn't meant for human consumption
> and not meant to be rendered to a user, then it isn't really a 
> "poster" and a more adequate attribute name needs to be used, 
> instead of "poster"
  The "poster" *is* rendered, just like the first frame of the video file is rendered when there is no poster attribute. 

  The poster is meant to be a placeholder for the video, the image that is shown until the video begins playing. Again, just like the first frame of the video file is shown when there is no poster attribute.

Received on Thursday, 6 January 2011 16:04:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:17 UTC