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

Robert O'Callahan, Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:15:20 +1300:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
> 
>> Replace it with a single multi-state attribute like "buffering" instead.
>> Values "none", "auto" (the default) and "full", or similar. Unless 
>> there's a
>> cleaner way to represent the semantics "this is (un)likely to be used"....
>> 
> 
> I'm still unconvinced three states will actually be needed, but this
> proposal sounds OK to me. At least it's forwards-extensible if more than two
> states do turn out to be needed.

+1 for the name. @buffer or @buffering seems like a better name(s) than 
@autobuffer.
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Monday, 4 January 2010 00:07:05 UTC