W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2008

[whatwg] video tag : loop for ever

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:03:04 +1100
Message-ID: <2c0e02830810151403p2b39baa6gdbef9ded807daaf9@mail.gmail.com>
Don't count on it: people leave tabs in browsers open and videos
playing and it might just play 9999999999999 times before anyone
touches the tab again.
Silvia.

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 5:03 AM, Kristof Zelechovski
<giecrilj at stegny.2a.pl> wrote:
> Play count 9999999999999 means just that number, it does not mean "forever"
> by itself.  It is only functionally like "forever" because no one is likely
> to let it loop till the play count specified is reached.  A 32-bit quantity
> is enough to get this effect.
> Chris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org
> [mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Joao Eiras
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 1:19 PM
> To: Henri Sivonen
> Cc: whatwg group
> Subject: Re: [whatwg] video tag : loop for ever
>
> Using a high number like 9999999999999 is, IMO, stupid.
>
> You'd be forced to tell in the spec that playcount would have to be a
> 16, 32, 64, or X bit big integer, and if anything overflows the
> boundaries imposed by the internal integer representation, then
> playcount would have to be rounded to the highest possible boundary or
> assume infinite looping.
> Else, some browser will use a 64bit representation while its neighbour
> will use a 32bit integer (common sense might find 64bit too big and
> awkward) but then an authoring tool or author use
> playcount="9999999999" (10 digits) and somehow the browser with 32bit
> playcount integer breaks.
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2008 14:03:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:44 UTC