On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > > > > > > Fair enough. I've specced #3 (#3 and #4 are simpler to implement > > > than #1 or #2, and the extra complexity doesn't seem to gain us > > > much. I've never heard of anamorphic video data with a ratio less > > > than 1.0, so assuming my experiences are representative, it's the > > > same as #1 in most cases anyway). > > > > Actually, standard 720x480 4:3 NTSC DVD video has an pixel aspect > > ratio of 8:9 and there is no shortage of it. While #3 is easier to > > both spec and implement, both we and Mozilla have already > > independently chosen to implement (and write tests for) #1, so I'd > > much prefer if that were specced. Chrome seems to not do anything and > > I don't know how to produce a suitable test file for Safari. Ok, done. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2009 00:27:53 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:48 GMT