- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:14:10 +1000
- To: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
- Cc: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>, Erik Mannens <erik.mannens@ugent.be>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
- Message-ID: <AANLkTikPKUbTOcApxU1xoV39GFzXd+zfKxFyChP38F=q@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl> wrote: > > On 10 sep 2010, at 13:01, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > > > It may actually be a good thing to propose spec text for the HTML spec, > because it will then make it a necessity for the browser vendors to > implement support and they understand what is actually asked of them. > > My angle would be the following (but note that I'm now pretending I'm an > HTML/scripting guy). > There are two things HTML could do with media fragments: (a) display > something reasonable, (b) pass the fragment parameter on to the DOM, so a > script can do something more elaborate. (b) isn't what HTML does with fragments of URIs. > (a) is the most sensible default. Whatever they display is actually not all > that important, as webpage/app designers should be able to override it. > > So I would suggest that they make the parameters of the MF url available to > scripting, as attributes on the HTMLMediaElement interface. This enables > scripts to access the MF data without duplicating the URL-parser. > We can already retrieve the URL for JavaScript - no new features are necessary. You can get the url of the video element as video.currentSrc which gives you the url and you can easily parse out the fragment. I have done just that in the demo at http://www.annodex.net/~silvia/itext/mediafrag.html . You could put a convenience function into HTML5 for the media elements to have e.g. video.fragment or something do it for you. I am assuming that's what you meant by adding it to the HTMLMediaElement - just adding an IDL attribute. I'm not sure that's necessary because nothing else in HTML5 has convenience functions for URL parsing. > By default, the browser would render only the MF-addressed part of the > media. For convenience, they should render a time-based MF in context (i.e. > putting in- and out-point at the beginning and end specified by the MF) and > spatial MF out-of-context (i.e. cropping to the requested rectangle). I think I agree with this. > However, scripts or webpages need a way to override this behavior. I don't think that makes much sense, because then it's not standardised any more. > One possibility is to specify (a) when the HTMLMediaElement attributes are > filled in and (b) when they are interpreted by the renderer, with the script > having a chance to fiddle the MF parameters in between. That's not going to happen - the process to load the media resource is already hugely complex and there are dependencies in there that cannot be interrupted by handing over control to a authored script. Would also be a huge security risk actually. > Something like "loadstart" event seems like an option: if the browser first > parses the URL and MF and puts the info in the DOM attributes, then raises > "loadstart", then uses the parameters from the attributes this sequence > gives a script a chance to override the default treatment of the MF. > > But another option would be to add an HTML-attribute (like > interpretMediaFragment="false") or CSS styling attribute to forestall the > default behavior. > Putting an attribute on the media elements or introduced a CSS style to determine how the resource is rendered may be possible, I don't know. I am not sure I would want to fight for this in HTML5. I think that all the highlighting can easily be done with HTML5 functionalities (SVG or Canvas on a video element to provide the highlighting or the annotation), so I would think that doing it all in script and not through the URL seems preferrable. Cheers, Silvia.
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 13:15:04 UTC