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

[Bug 13333] audio, video (and source) elements require param children or equivalent

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:22:33 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QlKB7-0007v6-Po@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13333

--- Comment #16 from Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> 2011-07-25 12:22:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> If the parameters and their processing aren't be standardized, then they also
> won't be implemented by browsers. Unlike with <object>, there is no <video>
> plug-in architecture to which parameters could be propagated, so only
> parameters that browsers understand would have any effect. Given that, Silvia's
> suggestion of using data-* attributes seems reasonable.

I've pointed out repeatedly that HTML5 currently states in 3.2.3.8 "User agents
must not derive any implementation behavior from these attributes or values.
Specifications intended for user agents must not define these attributes to
have any meaningful values." Unless this prohibition is removed, then what you
suggest won't work.

Secondly, I did not say that parameters won't be standardized. HTML5 and W3C
are not the only standards/organizations. Other organizations define profiles
for HTML based UAs, and, indeed I am in the process of drafting such a profile
for an organization that defines compliance requirements for devices in a home
network. Requirements to support specific parameters will be defined by such
profiles and UA suppliers will be required to implement specific parameters.

This will remain a fact of life of HTML5. Why? Because HTML5 does not define
many behaviors of UAs. For example, HTML5 does not mandate specific support for
CSS properties. So HTML5 is not the be-all and end-all for defining a UA or
defining compliance between interoperable UAs.

Regarding plug-in architectures, object (in HTML5 or HTML4) does not really
define a plug-in architecture. Further, there is no reason that a UA should not
treat video/audio in an identical fashion to object as far as plug-in (or
built-in) support is concerned. I fully expect UAs to implement support for
some media types on video/audio directly, and to delegate other media types to
plug-ins. That is an implementation detail of UAs, and the spec should not
preclude or assume an implementation strategy.

So your statement that "there is no <video> plug-in architecture to which
parameters could be propagated" is not correct since it presumes implementation
details that are outside the scope of HTML5.

G.

-- 
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, 25 July 2011 12:22:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:14 UTC