- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 19:56:09 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11984 --- Comment #27 from Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> 2011-03-07 19:56:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #26) > (In reply to comment #24) > > A few of the things in > > <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/NoVideoContentType#Negative_Effects> > > are not solved by my new suggestion, so I'd consider not fixing these cons: > > > > * The incentive for supporting many different equivalent MIME types in > > canPlayType and <source type> is removed, as they come only from legacy > > Content-Type issues. > > > > * Some legacy MIME types, such as audio/x-pn-wav, can likely be removed from > > implementations of canPlayType. > > > > This is damage we'll have to live with unless we always sniff, it might be OK > > if implementors exercise some contraint in which MIME types they add support > > for. WAVE might be a lost case, though. > > I didn't really understand these two points. I'm sure I'm just missing some > background info. Please could you elaborate? It relates to this point from "Issues for Implementors": * In order to be compatible with what is sent in Content-Type, implementations must support several synonymous MIME types. This is exposed via canPlayType, where there was no legacy to consider originally, creating unnecessary room for incompatibilities. For example, Firefox supports 4 different MIME types for WAVE, Opera supports 3 and Chrome supports 2. (source: <http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Video_type_parameters#Browser_Support>) If Content-Type was always ignored, this pollution of canPlayType would not happen. Actually, we could perhaps fix it in my new proposal as well by adding this point: * Content-Type is normalized to allow for synonyms like audio/wave and audio/wav that are necessary for compat, but via canPlayType only the canonical form is exposed, so only one would return "maybe"/"probably". I don't think it's actually worth the complexity though, I just consider it a con relative to ignoring Content-Type. -- 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, 7 March 2011 19:56:13 UTC