W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2009

Re: AW: Public feedback on HTML5 video

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:56:39 -0500
Message-ID: <7c2a12e20912281456r182fa555p543109a08f64467b@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philip J├Ągenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Cc: "Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich" <k.scheppe@telekom.de>, HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:44 PM, Philip J├Ągenstedt <philipj@opera.com> wrote:
> The only wiggle-room this leaves for implementation is whether to show the
> poster frame or the first video frame when the first video frame has been
> decoded. I think it should be the poster image, if other browser vendors
> agree perhaps the spec should simply say that.

That seems sensible to me as well.  Why would implementations show the
first video frame if a poster is explicitly provided?

> If the author doesn't want to use a poster image they simply shouldn't use
> that attribute. To show a certain frame of video, set .currentTime in a
> script.

That's not equivalent.  In particular, it will change what happens
when the user hits play, and will probably change what gets buffered.
Not to mention it requires script.

Perhaps someone should suggest to the Media Fragments WG that they
should create a syntax where you can address a frame of a video like a
picture?  The current WD doesn't seem to allow it:

http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/WD-media-fragments-spec/
Received on Monday, 28 December 2009 22:57:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:55 UTC