Silvia Pfeiffer, Thu, 22 Mar 2012 10:09:48 +1100: > Therefore, since we agree that what matters is > the UI and how it functions in the UI, there is no distinction between > a paused frame and the poster. On this, I agree with you and Janina. > Therefore, from a logical and UI point of view, the jpg is > indeed part of the video and its genesis does not matter. Right. But what implications do we draw from this? For example: It was agreed, I think, between David and Sean that the poster does not need to be taken from the video *file*. But even so: What if I find a nice picture that I *do* include in the video file, as its first frame, because some UA that I care about do not support the @poster attribute? Thus: I think it doesn't matter that it is part of the video. What matters is that it - the frame or the more or less accidental image file - has been chosen as poster. A poster is, in principle, not a presentational image - the assumption is that the poster tries to tell us why we should take the time to play the video. -- Leif H SilliReceived on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 23:39:43 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:47 GMT