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

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

From: Léonie Watson <lwatson@nomensa.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 17:42:24 +0000
To: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>
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: <D4219A0ECCAE794C9ED7DC6F5A4C0CD537B311C8DD@jupiter.intranet.nomensa.com>
"Why can't this work?

<video src=kittens.webm poster=kittens.jpg alt="two lovely kittens in a basket">

with the alt being the short textual alternative that can be used to seduce people to click the video (presumably, what the explicit poster or first frame is to do), at which point the full glory subtitles/ tracks etc are unleashed?"

	Would a potential problem be that developers might define the alt based on the video content, instead of the poster image?
 


Regards,
Léonie.

--
Nomensa - humanising technology

Léonie Watson            |  Director of Accessibility
t. +44 (0)117 929 7333    


-----Original Message-----
From: public-html-a11y-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-a11y-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Lawson
Sent: 06 January 2011 16:28
To: Gregory J. Rosmaita; Eric Carlson
Cc: Janina Sajka; Laura Carlson; John Foliot; HTML Accessibility Task Force
Subject: Re: Issue 142: Video Poster (or, what's in a name?)

On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:03:04 -0000, Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>
wrote:

> 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.

It's a shame that if it would presumably be too confusing to renamed poster to be "placeholder" as in

<video src=kittens.webm placeholder=kittens.jpg>

because (apparently) video producers are used to the word "poster" and web developers are getting used to the placeholder attribute on form inputs.

Why can't this work?

<video src=kittens.webm poster=kittens.jpg alt="two lovely kittens in a basket">

with the alt being the short textual alternative that can be used to seduce people to click the video (presumably, what the explicit poster or first frame is to do), at which point the full glory subtitles/ tracks etc are unleashed?

Bruce not-representing-Opera
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2011 17:43:23 UTC

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