W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Should <video> buffer control be tri-state?

From: Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2010 20:38:13 -0800
Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Kornel <kornel@geekhood.net>, public-html@w3.org
Message-id: <FC167178-F0D5-41E9-9516-1CE8C7D15B1F@apple.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>

On Jan 9, 2010, at 8:16 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:

> On 1/9/10 1:19 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>> I suggest calling it preload (preload="no", preload="metadata", preload="all"?).
>>>> 
>>>  "all" is a poor choice because it may not be possible for the entire resource to be stored on the client machine, so you certainly don't want to preload the entire thing.
>>> 
>>> eric
>> 
>> I agree. Maybe "progressive" is the correct word? (nipped from
>> "progressive streaming", of course)
> 
> What about "playthrough" (as in, keep buffering at least until you would fire the canplaythrough event)?
> 
  Great suggestion!

  Given "metadata" and "playthough", I wonder if "none" would make more sense than "no".

eric
Received on Sunday, 10 January 2010 04:38:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:12 UTC