On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
> > >
> > > Fair enough. I've specced #3 (#3 and #4 are simpler to implement
> > > than #1 or #2, and the extra complexity doesn't seem to gain us
> > > much. I've never heard of anamorphic video data with a ratio less
> > > than 1.0, so assuming my experiences are representative, it's the
> > > same as #1 in most cases anyway).
> >
> > Actually, standard 720x480 4:3 NTSC DVD video has an pixel aspect
> > ratio of 8:9 and there is no shortage of it. While #3 is easier to
> > both spec and implement, both we and Mozilla have already
> > independently chosen to implement (and write tests for) #1, so I'd
> > much prefer if that were specced. Chrome seems to not do anything and
> > I don't know how to produce a suitable test file for Safari.
Ok, done.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'