- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 02:02:03 -0700
- To: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>
- Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
On Aug 28, 2009, at 1:30 AM, Joe D Williams wrote: > Hi again Maciej, > >>> ...<param> ... Yes, this is what is generally used to pass >>> initialization parameters > to plugins invoked via <object> > > Not only for initialization, but these names can represent live > interfaces accessible using the host DOM. For example, as well as > initialization a common use of <param> is defining an interface tor > sending a target content uri into the plugin. Somehow the host > context and nested context agree on a list of these nonstandard > (that is, not listed in the html standard) interfaces. The <param>s > included by the author are sent during initialization then can be > live while the plugin is running. Any <param>s not recognized by the > nested context are ignored. > > That is where the association with assistive tech comes in. A set of > <param> elements (and DOM listeners) could define hooks between > assistive technology and the plugin so that, for example, the at > could take control of the object. You can't use <param> elements to talk to an <object> element on the fly. In practice when you do this, browsers re-initialize the plugin. For the use case of communicating with a running plugin without restarting it, browsers allow plugins to expose a scripting interface to JavaScript. > > Now, since all appropriate standardized interfaces for <audio> and > <video> are defined, those objects don't need <param> anymore. Oops > that statement leads me to think of course <param name='' value=''> > should be allowed as a general-purpose opportunity for the host and > plugin to communicate in all mixed embedded content elements The > host browser could be free to ignore <param name='' value=''> > everywhere else but <object>. > > Again, nothing concrete concerning actual application connections. > At most <param> could be a general hook for audio/video/iframe/ > canvas/object and any live content where extensions of the standard > html interfaces might help. audio, video, iframe and canvas do not emebd plugins, they are built- in content. So I don't see how this applies. - Maciej > > Thanks and Best Regards, > Joe > > > > . > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe D Williams" <joedwil@earthlink.net > > > To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com> > Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>; <public-html@w3.org> > Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 7:16 AM > Subject: Re: ISSUE-9: video-synchronization - suggest closing on > 2009-08-27 > > >> Hi Maciej, >> >>> What I'm not clear on is how this [<param>] would apply to <video> >>> or <audio>. >> >> I'm not sure either. When I read the comment about <param> I had a >> passing idea that a set could be used to pass info that was not >> 'standard' in html but might be somehow usable to assistive tech. >> But I don't have any actual idea of what the info might be. If I was >> aiming at a specific tool, then the tool might have some special >> keywords and data it recognized to produce some interaction, but I >> don't know of anything specific. >> >> Thanks and Best Regarrds, >> Joe >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maciej Stachowiak" >> <mjs@apple.com> >> To: "Joe D Williams" <joedwil@earthlink.net> >> Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>; <public-html@w3.org> >> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 11:58 PM >> Subject: Re: ISSUE-9: video-synchronization - suggest closing on >> 2009-08-27 >> >> >>> Hi Joe, >>> >>> On Aug 24, 2009, at 8:37 PM, Joe D Williams wrote: >>> >>>>> something about mechanisms provided by <object param=...> that >>>>> don't seem to be provided by <video>. I hope somebody sends >>>>> mail about that soon >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> I think it isn't about >>>> >>>> <object param='xx' >>>> >>>> it is about >>>> <object type='mime' ... other standard attrs> >>>> <param name='xxx' value='ccc'> >>>> <param name='ddd' value='eee'> >>>> ...maybe more optional <param> elements >>>> <fallbackhtml> stuff></fallbackhtml> >>>> </object> >>>> >>>> The param elements establish DOM interfaces to and from the nested >>>> context. >>>> In general, the best use of <param> elements I have seen is to >>>> provide optional or required runtime info to and from the native >>>> device or plugin device that is running the content. The >>>> <param>(s) give ways to transport name-value pairs that are not >>>> defined as part of the standard html language <object> interface. >>>> It is complicated, but the general idea is that the host may get >>>> the embedded or native application running then send and receive >>>> runtime stuff through the params. If the info is defined, like >>>> for media elements such as <video> that have a list of standard >>>> attributes, the configurable params are not now provided. >>>> >>> >>> Yes, this is what is generally used to pass initialization >>> parameters to plugins invoked via <object>. Since the capabilities >>> of plugins are completely open-ended, it's hard to define >>> attributes up front that pass in the needed information. >>> >>> What I'm not clear on is how this would apply to <video> or >>> <audio>. These have a limited purpose, and parameters can be passed >>> in via the predefined attributes on the element. In existing >>> implementations, the set of codecs is either hardcoded or serviced >>> by a more limited plugin interface that cannot accept arbitrary >>> parameters. I'm not totally sure I follow all of your message, but >>> it seems like maybe you are saying the same thing, that <param> >>> doesn't seem like it makes sense for a fixed-function element like >>> <video>. >>> >>> So I'm not really clear on what <param> elements for <video> or >>> <audio> would do. Can anyone give a concrete example of how <param> >>> might be used with these elements? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Maciej >>> >>> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 28 August 2009 09:03:22 UTC