W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Should <video> buffer control be tri-state?

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 17:53:39 +1100
Message-ID: <2c0e02831001022253o3168e414if74aee9c0a7f0447@mail.gmail.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>> It would have no visible effect other than performance, and the difference
>> would be much less in the typical test environment where the author has a
>> very fast pipe to his or her deployment server.
> The performance effect is very noticeable, and if your controls UI shows the
> buffer state, it's quite obvious what's going on.
> One problem with making 'autobuffer' tri-state is that autobuffer="off" (or
> whatever) is actually going to enable buffering in user-agents that support
> the current autobuffer spec (i.e., Firefox).

Only until current implementations have caught up. I don't see this as
a big problem. Everyone expects HTML5 to still change and I have seen
more Webpage with the video element wrongly coded with
autobuffer="off" and autobuffer="on" than just using it as a boolean
attribute. Even tinyvid.tv - Chris Double's test platform for Mozilla
- is using autobuffer="true" and controls="controls" as attributes.
It's more natural.

Also, since Firefox is currently the only browser actually not
autobuffering, it is only noticeable for people who rely on the
Firefox behaviour - which would be few.

Received on Sunday, 3 January 2010 06:54:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:06 UTC