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

Re: <video> readyState oddities

From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:29:09 +0100
To: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vq3jivylsr6mfa@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:18:31 +0100, Silvia Pfeiffer  
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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".

I also think that this will not be a problem most of the time. Still, any  
inconsistency between implementations will eventually cause bugs, so I  
hope we can get interoperability on this after figuring out what behavior  
actually makes sense.

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software
Received on Friday, 18 February 2011 11:29:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:22 UTC