Re: ISSUE-179 av_param: Chairs Solicit Proposals

On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Glenn Adams <> wrote:
> As I pointed out in the change proposal rationale, x-* attributes are
> unacceptable for use by other standards fora (and W3C WGs) for defining
> specifications that involve additional A/V parameters. Such usage impedes
> standardization.

On the contrary. It allows other standards fora to experiment with
attributes that they believe are necessary and once those attributes
have been proven to be necessary and widely accepted, they can be
introduced into HTML by the W3C.

> Further, proposing specific parameters is not necessarily possible or
> practical:
> (1) the set of additional parameters is not fixed, and grows/changes over
> time;

That's not a problem, but an advantage of the way in which HTML markup works.

> (2) even if specific parameters were identified, obtaining consensus on
> their standardization as new attributes may not be feasible;

Above you say that other standards bodies will introduce new
attributes and here you say their introduction for standardization is
not possible. I believe you have to make up your mind whether you want
a standardized attribute or not. And if you do, in the end it's not
what is specified that counts, but what is implemented.

> The bottom line is that object supports param, and that the intent of A/V
> elements was to supplant (and extend) object semantics.

You are mistaken. The intent of the media elements was not to extend
object semantics. That is not possible, because the object element was
introduced for a different purpose, namely for plugins and not for
audio and video resources. The media elements make media resources a
native part of the HTML markup, that's all. They do not replace or
supplant the object/embed elements.

> To do this in a
> practical, backward compatible manner requires param or an effective,
> standards compliant equivalent.

That would have been the lazy approach, which would not have made
media elements a native part of HTML at all, but would indeed have
been a replacement of the object/embed approach for media resources.
Fortunately we have made the effort to analyze exact requirements of
media resources and have identified attributes and subelements that
are required and are therefore in a position to provide accessible
media resources with a good JS API. Making the effort to analyze the
actual use cases and creating actual elements/attributes for it has
the big advantage of making that functionality accessible and giving
it a JS API. It's what we want to continue doing for the media

> It has been suggested that data-* or x-* may serve this purpose. I have
> shown how data-* does not unless the current prohibitions in HTML5 are
> removed. That leaves only x-*, which is anathema to any standards based
> extensions.

On the contrary: they are a first step towards standardization.

Best Regards,

Received on Sunday, 30 October 2011 07:20:39 UTC