- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 21:11:32 +1000
- To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
- Cc: public-media-fragment@w3.org
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> wrote: > On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:24:33 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer > <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> >> wrote: >> >>> The pixel syntax operates on the intrinsic size of the video, not the >>> display size. The result would be the same regardless of fullscreen, >>> modulo >>> scale of course. >> >> >> Is this how image maps work, too? > > Oddly enough, according to > <http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-map-element.html#processing-model>, > "For historical reasons, the coordinates must be interpreted relative to the > displayed image, even if it stretched using CSS or the image element's width > and height attributes." > > I don't think we should copy this quirk, though. I don't actually know which is easier to understand for authors. I'm quite torn on this. Silvia.
Received on Saturday, 9 April 2011 11:12:20 UTC