W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: [whatwg] Video proposals

From: Robert Brodrecht <w3c@robertdot.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:42:25 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <49780.66.151.50.244.1174066945.squirrel@www.robertdot.org>
To: <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
Cc: <w3c@robertdot.org>, <public-html@w3.org>, <whatwg@whatwg.org>

Laurens Holst wrote:
> Sure, native video playback, yay. But what has that got to do with
> creating a <video> element instead of using <object>. Objects can play
> Theora, too, you know. Natively. Just like browsers can render SVG in
> <object> tags, natively.

Object tags can display jpeg, gif, png, etc. images, but I use img
instead.  If you are a proponent for dropping all media-based elements in
favor of only using object, that's a different story.  If you already
stopped using the img tag in favor of the object tag, it wouldn't make
sense to you to add a video tag.  As someone who does use the img tag on
occasion, trying to create a cross-browser object tags and having to fall
back on embed for IE or do some crazy voodoo magic[1] just to play a video
on my site is quite a pain in the ass.  Simply typing '<video
src="myvideo.ogg">' and letting the browser figure out all the rest is
just easier.

And it's more semantic.  An object can be anything.  A video is a video.

[1] http://www.alistapart.com/articles/byebyeembed/
-- 
Robert <http://robertdot.org>
Received on Friday, 16 March 2007 17:29:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 16 March 2007 17:29:06 GMT