W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2007

[whatwg] The issue of interoperability of the <video> element

From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:27:22 -0400
Message-ID: <6b9c91b20706261727y6fa91332jb62d9bad2197cf4a@mail.gmail.com>
On 6/26/07, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> It is not true that Theora is not used today.

revision3.net is another site that uses/provides Theora.
<http://revision3.net/diggnation>

With videolan at least, the theora ones use less cpu than the other
formats, which makes it easier to watch things on slower computers.

Browser plugins suck though.
See <http://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=35815&sid=d20cbd9c67c552fd230edfeb6bd9ad70>
and <http://forums.divx.com/forum/viewTopic.php?id=2970> and the
windows media player plugin for examples.

Also,  you have liveconnect, xpconnect and npruntime scripting issues
and plugins reporting only a small amount of file types they support
when they actually support more.

You also get plugin installation problems where plugin vendors don't
set up the installers properly and browsers can't find the plugins.

Anyway, I definitely want native theora support  right in the browser
so issues like those can be avoided and I can take the support with me
on a USB stick for example.

If theora performance for the video element is as good or better than
videolan, that would be awesome.

I really wish Apple could take the risk.

-- 
Michael
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 17:27:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:56 UTC