Re: [whatwg] Video proposals

Laurens Holst said:
> I  don't see how you're going to avoid that with
> <video> unless you intend  to make it a non-pluggable system, which does
> not seem like a good idea.

I think that was the idea.  I don't need plugins for certain media files,
e.g., GIF, JPEG, and PNG (and maybe WAV, MP3, and MIDI using bgsound in IE
if that is still around).  If a certain set of cross-platform video codecs
could be supported, there would be no need for a plugin.  The OS / browser
would be built to understand those codecs, and a hefty set of plugin
controls wouldn't need to be exposed to the author.

What WHATWG has been shooting for, is one common codec.  At this point,
WHATWG folks want Theora.  Apparently, that may still have some licensing
issues.  However, if the browser vendors would come together and figure
out a set of codecs to support - or just ONE modern, shared codec - it
could be a de facto standard and wouldn't have to be put in HTML 5.  In
this new age of openness where lead developers are exposed to users via
blogs, public mailing lists like this and WHATWG, etc., they might just be
able to pull it off.

Robert <>

Received on Monday, 19 March 2007 17:18:10 UTC