- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 00:17:30 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22143
Aaron Colwell <acolwell@google.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |acolwell@google.com
Assignee|adrianba@microsoft.com |acolwell@google.com
--- Comment #2 from Aaron Colwell <acolwell@google.com> ---
HTMLMediaElement contains videoTracks which would be present on an
HTMLAudioElement eventhough video tracks would not be displayed. I don't know
the history of this choice, but it does set precedent for video related
functionality to reside there. What is the perceived harm in having an
attribute in HTMLMediaElement? This seems like a natural place to put any
future playback stats we may want to expose, video specific or otherwise.
If the prevailing opinion still favors placing this on HTMLVideoElement, then
I'd like to propose that MediaPlaybackQuality be renamed to
VideoPlaybackQuality and the attribute name be changed to videoPlaybackQuality.
Dropping Playback from both names may be a good idea as well. I'm suggesting
this primarily to avoid an attribute name conflict if we ever do decide to put
a playbackQuality attribute on HTMLMediaElement that contains metrics suitable
for all types of media elements.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 24 May 2013 00:17:31 UTC