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

[whatwg] <video> element proposal

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:26:42 +0100
Message-ID: <va2hv2hcci7lv6jp9v5860memgf5i5ua7m@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* H?kon Wium Lie wrote:
>I think we want to make video a first class citizen of the web. That
>means, IMHO, that there must be a simple way to add video to HTML
>pages. I don't think one shoulr rely on other languages for this,
>although I'm perfectly happy supporting those other languages as well.
>Part of the reason why we could to this so quickly is the work we have
>done on SVG.

Absolutely, and http://www.w3.org/2004/04/webapps-cdf-ws/papers/opera
"Basic Web application features should be implementable using behaviors,
scripting, and style sheets in IE6 today so that authors have a clear
migration path."

In case of video, there is no need to implement anything using style
sheets, behaviors, or scripting, you can use it directly, right now,
it's easy as pie,

  <html xmlns:t="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:time">
  <?import namespace="t" implementation="#default#time2">
    <t:video src='example.video'></t:video>

and based on an open W3C standard. No need for separate languages at
all. It's not perfect, but the terrible design of XMLHttpRequest,
<canvas>, and other features also did not prevent their inclusion in
"Web Applications 1.0". Don't you think the differences between the
<video> features in IE5+, SMIL, SVG, and HTML should be minimized,
and using them in IE be made as easy as technically feasible?
Bj?rn H?hrmann ? mailto:bjoern at hoehrmann.de ? http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 ? Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 ? http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim ? PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 ? http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:26:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:53 UTC