W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2003

Re: video in SVG1.2

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 13:58:56 +0200
Message-ID: <37274082125.20030502135856@w3.org>
To: "Sigurd Lerstad" <sigler@bredband.no>
CC: www-svg@w3.org

On Thursday, May 1, 2003, 2:13:28 PM, Sigurd wrote:


SL> Hello,

>>From the spec:

SL> ***********************
SL> 4.3.3 The video element The video element specifies a video file
SL> which is to be rendered to provide synchronised video. The usual
SL> SMIL animation elements are used to start and stop the video at
SL> the appropriate times.
SL> *************************

SL> What does this mean? Wouldn't it be better if <video> was a timed element
SL> and had begin, dur etc. ? (just like in SMIL)

It will probably have those, too, since one of the other things that
SVG adds is the time container concept and the timing attributes.

SL> Does <video> have preserveAspectRatio, just like <image> ?

Yes.

SL> Are <video> and <image> interchangeable elements, much like smil ?

No. Actually if you look at SMIL viewers, if you put a video on an
audio element etc the results are not interoperable either.

What SMIL says is that audio, video and image are all subclassed from,
or syntactic sugar for, the media element. That statement has doubtful
utility.

So, for example, we don't plan on adding a preserveAspectRatio to the
audio element. In the context of a graphics format, distinguishing
between elements that affect the visual rendering and those that
don't seems very necessary; and it also helps implementations optimize
if they don't have to anticipate sometimes getting a video stream on
an audio element.


-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Friday, 2 May 2003 07:59:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:25 GMT