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

Re: [whatwg] Video proposals

From: Matthew Ratzloff <matt@builtfromsource.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 12:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <49457.24.113.147.1.1174160925.squirrel@webmail.builtfromsource.com>
To: public-html@w3.org

On Sat, March 17, 2007 12:33 pm, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:28:50 +0100, Matthew Ratzloff
> <matt@builtfromsource.com> wrote:
>> I don't understand why a <video> element is "easier to manipulate than
>> [an] <object> element".  How does a unique name make it easier to work
>> with?
>
> Having a dedicated API allows for a dedicated API. I tried to elaborate on
> this on my blog earlier today:
>
>    http://annevankesteren.nl/2007/03/video

I thought the comments raised some valid points.  Do Flash videos use the
<video> element or the <object> element?  Is there going to be an <audio>
element as well?  Why not <media>, since the principles of video and audio
are basically the same?

-Matt
Received on Saturday, 17 March 2007 19:48:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 17 March 2007 19:48:55 GMT