W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2011

Re: <video> readyState oddities

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:18:31 +1100
Message-ID: <AANLkTike7zLxWPu8QsCTsupL7LP+AhvE7nq__mfVr81A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 03:51:20 +0100, Silvia Pfeiffer
> <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think more important than the HAVE_METADATA state is the event
>> "onloadedmetadata". As long as we don't remove the event with the
>> state, I - speaking as a Web author - would not find it a problem when
>> the state was removed.
>
> Certainly the events will stay, what I'm questioning is if readyState will
> ever be HAVE_METADATA, as seen by scripts.

As a script author, I don't think I would rely on it. I would always
write "video.readyState >= video.HAVE_METADATA", which - as browsers
never seem to reach that state - could equally be written as
"video.readyState >= video.HAVE_CURRENT_DATA".

Cheers,
Silvia.
Received on Friday, 18 February 2011 11:19:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:22 GMT