Re: ISSUE-10: suggest closing: how similar should SMIL and <video> attribute names be?

On Aug 13, 2009, at 3:43 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> Dan Connolly wrote:
>> Taking silence as assent on this sort of thing is
>> tricky... I'm checking internally with the W3C staff,
>> but one thing I've forgotten to do in some other
>> cases is also check directly with the chairs and WGs.
> The real issue is that this (as well as other) issues have sat  
> dormant with no forward progress for a long period of time.
>> Dick, Eric, would you please
>> (a) acknowledge receipt,
>> (b) let us know whether the SMIL WG is OK with this?
>> If you can't do them both in a few days, please do
>> (a) and estimate when you can do (b).
> That's exactly what we need.  If this request attracts an owner and  
> a schedule to either close the issue or to identify tangible changes  
> that need to be taken to HTML5, then the issue will remain open.

I've done a little more research on the technical details, and it  
looks like some of the <video> element attributes that were similar in  
purpose to SMIL but different in details, have now been removed from  
HTML5. In particular the start and end attributes are gone. Comment  
from the SMIL WG is of course still welcome, but I believe a great  
deal of the overlap and motive for alignment is gone.


Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 23:26:21 UTC