Re: [whatwg] Video proposals

Robert Brodrecht schreef:
>>
>> Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there is a single reason 
>> why the browser couldn’t play back content embedded with an <object> 
>> tag, like it’s supposed to. What’s more, that would allow it to work 
>> with existing web content, too. Plus it’s backwards compatible.
>>
>
> I'm quite certain that the video element was meant to fight things 
> like Flash because it would offer cross-platform video easily through 
> an open codec.  Currently, Flash is the closest thing we have to 
> cross-platform video.  Flash is a closed, proprietary, expensive 
> technology.  Theora is an open, free technology.  The video element is 
> an ideological addition that would allow fallback.  It could easily 
> fall back to an object element during the transition into browser 
> support, which would be backward compatible with HMTL 4.
>
> Video on the web is difficult.  In this day, it shouldn't be.

Sure, native video playback, yay. But what has that got to do with 
creating a <video> element instead of using <object>. Objects can play 
Theora, too, you know. Natively. Just like browsers can render SVG in 
<object> tags, natively.


~Grauw

-- 
Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.