- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 16:42:11 -0700
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, "rubys@intertwingly.net" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "mjs@apple.com" <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Mar 21, 2012, at 16:39 , Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > 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. Yes. But it's perhaps better viewed as a more attractive presentation of the initial state than the common first-frame would be. I hope something about the page, and why you went to it, tells you what the video is about and why you should take the time to play it. David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 23:43:16 UTC