W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > March 2007

[whatwg] Video proposals

From: Gareth Hay <gazhay@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:26:25 +0000
Message-ID: <4835659A-65F2-402D-925E-BFB335B171C8@gmail.com>
I don't see the problem with this.

Object is a tag to represent just about anything, even text/html  
renders in an object.
Can you identify a use case where you *need* to know before you get a  
content-type header?

Gaz

On 17 Mar 2007, at 15:17, Matthew Raymond wrote:

> Laurens Holst wrote:
>> So make the object mime type optional, only indicative. It will  
>> receive
>> it from the server anyway.
>
>    The problem with dropping the MIME type is that files on the  
> Internet
> don't require extensions. They already have MIME types. Therefore,  
> as a
> web author looking at someone else's markup, how would you identify if
> the following are images, video or audio?...
>
> | <object data="sonido"></object>
> | <object data="immagine"></object>
> | <object data="s?rie da televis?o"></object>
> | <object data="suono"></object>
> | <object data="MyFamily"></object>
> | <object data="pel?cula"></object>
> | <object data="pintura"></object>
> | <object data="Nature"></object>
> | <object data="Ton"></object>
> | <object data="Fernsehenerscheinen"></object>
> | <object data="WhoKnows"></object>
>
>
>    With a <video> element, you know it's video just by looking at it.
Received on Saturday, 17 March 2007 08:26:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:33 UTC