W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > July 2011

[Bug 13276] Not allowing author or developer to have absolute control over media playback

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 19:27:45 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QitTl-0007lR-TH@jessica.w3.org>

Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
           Keywords|                            |TrackerRequest

--- Comment #27 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2011-07-18 19:27:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
> satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
> you have additional information and would like the Editor to reconsider, please
> reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
> Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
> title and text for the Tracker Issue; or you may create a Tracker Issue
> yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
> Status: Rejected
> Change Description: no spec change
> Rationale: Media element implementers from two major browsers have commented
> here questioning the utility of the proposed change.  The overriding principle
> guiding the development of web standards today is that they must match
> implementations.  If implementers are not interested in implementing the
> feature, it's a nonstarter.  Currently it seems that there's no implementer
> interest here.  If at least one major implementer is interested in implementing
> this feature, please reopen the bug.  Otherwise the spec will not change.  We
> do not spec features that will not be implemented, because it wastes everyone's
> time.
> (In reply to comment #21)
> > I don't believe there's a restriction on bugs that requires that we hunt down
> > "real world" examples, especially for a specification that's still in LC status
> > and still undergoing significant changes. 
> Bug filers are not required to provide real-world use-cases for features they
> propose.  However, bugs that don't have clear use-cases are much more likely to
> be closed NEEDSINFO or WONTFIX, so it's wise to explain the use-cases you're
> trying to meet in as much detail and with as much supporting evidence as
> possible.  In addition to lacking implementer support, your comments here do
> not convincingly demonstrate that there are pages that need this feature.

There are many different real world examples--all using Flash. Just check out
the many movie-specific web sites. If you need a start, I would suggest the



Even the ever popular Harry Potter movie site


And they'll most likely continue to use Flash, because HTML5 video too heavily
restricts the web developer/author.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 18 July 2011 19:27:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:55 UTC