- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 13:00:18 +1100
- To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
- Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>, Leeroy <soupress@gmail.com>, Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>, Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com>
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 2:54 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer > <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 28 Feb 2014 17:46, "Philip Jägenstedt" <philipj@opera.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer >>> <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Eric Carlson <eric.carlson@apple.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On Feb 27, 2014, at 8:31 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Raphaël Troncy >>> >>> <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> What about <video>? And let's not looking at corner cases such as >>> >>>> #t=1,2. >>> >>>> People are sharing *real* fragments! >>> >>> >>> >>> The problem is the same with video, if you want to loop a particular >>> >>> scene over and over you don't want a random number of frames from the >>> >>> following scene to be shown just before the loop. This will happen if >>> >>> the looping isn't implemented inside the media framework. >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> For whatever it is worth, I agree with Philip - consistent and >>> >> accurate gapless looping is not possible without low level support from the >>> >> media engine. >>> > >>> > Isn't that true also for looping over full files? So doesn't that mean >>> > that the @loop attribute is useless? >>> >>> As Eric pointed out there is a difference. Without media framework >>> support looping a fragment will play beyond the loop point, while the >>> looping the entire resource will pause for a random number of >>> milliseconds at each loop. (I honestly don't know if the loop >>> attribute is useful or not, since I've never seen it used outside of >>> test cases and demos.) >> >> Surely it can't be worse than what we are doing with MSE and HLS. > > I'm not sure what you mean by worse, but MSE can't do gapless looping > between arbitrary points. How would it determine whether the next chunk is provided from a consecutive part of the video or from a completely different position? The browser just gets the data and interprets it. If it can decode it fast enough, it will be gapless, if not, it won't. I don't understand how looping is any different from seeking? >>> Will you be filing an HTML bug on the fragment end time issue? I am thinking about it... >>> Would >>> it help inform the discussion to have use counters for when fragment >>> start and end times are applied in Blink? >> >> If you could also count how many are using JS to imitate looping (given that >> FAIK not all browsers support the loop attribute), then we would get good >> numbers of use cases. > > In my ad hoc testing all current browsers support the > HTMLMediaElement.loop IDL attribute at least, which browsers lack > support? Oh, last time I checked, Firefox wasn't supporting it yet but it seems that has been fixed since. > I don't really know how one would detect and count scripted looping, > as currentTime could be set at any time for any reason. Right, I don't think we would do a use counter in blink. We could, however, check on a collection of Web pages that use the <video> or <audio> elements whether they do seeking in JS. Anyone doing seeking - no matter whether it's for the media fragment use case or for something else - would want gapless playback (always assuming those seek actions are during playback). Is there a web page collection anywhere that we could use to do some of this analysis? (I know I've used it in several applications and I know from FOMS that all of the HTML5 video player providers are concerned about gapless playback). Cheers, Silvia.
Received on Sunday, 2 March 2014 02:01:05 UTC