- From: Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich <k.scheppe@telekom.de>
- Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 22:11:38 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Jeremy Keith" <jeremy@adactio.com>
- Cc: "HTMLwg" <public-html@w3.org>
Hi, I like it,but would like to rephrase: "...Its absence tells the user agent that the media element will not be used." It has to be explicit. -- Kai ________________________________ Von: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] Gesendet: Mo 28.12.2009 20:25 An: Jeremy Keith Cc: HTMLwg Betreff: Re: Public feedback on HTML5 video On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Jeremy Keith <jeremy@adactio.com> wrote: > Is the absence of the autobuffer attribute an explicit request not to > pre-buffer? > > Currently, the spec doesn't clearly answer that question. It only describes > what happens when the autobuffer attribute is present; it doesn't describe > what happens when the autobuffer attribute is not present. > > Here is my suggestion for the updated text: > > "The autobuffer attribute is a boolean attribute. Its presence hints to the > user agent that the author believes that the media element will likely be > used, even though the element does not have an autoplay attribute. Its > absence hints to the user agent that the author believes that the media > element might never be used." > > This extra sentence ties the absence of the attribute to author intention: > something that is currently missing. This sounds like a good change that will clear up any confusion about the intending meaning of @autobuffer. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 28 December 2009 21:15:57 UTC