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

[whatwg] <video> element feedback

From: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 13:57:37 +0100
Message-ID: <2EFB8F3A-B246-4332-B09E-A7796699BEC3@crissov.de>
David "liorean" Andersson:
> On 21/03/07, Robert Brodrecht <whatwg at robertdot.org> wrote:
>> Christoph P?per said:
>> >
>> >    <form method="MEDIA">
>> >      <video src="pretty.ogg"/>
>> >      <button type="play"/>
>> >    </form>
>> I was somewhat concerned with the script-only controls.

Chris Adams:
|  <video src='some_file.ogg'>
|    <button type='playpause' />
|  </video>

|  <form action="video:" target="video element id">
|    <input type="button" name="play">
|  </form>

> <button type="play" for="idref_to_video">play</button>
> <progress type="played" for=idref_to_video></progress>
> <progress type="buffered" for=idref_to_video></progress>

Of these ideas Chris Adams', to which yours might be considered an  
extension, is probably the easiest, for authors at least.

I did not put much thinking in the |method| method, but I thought in  
some regard the containing element should not look like a usual | 
form| and this was the first best thing I came up with. If the | 
action| attribute is a better place or |video| could be allowed to  
have (certain) autoassigned form control children, that would be just  
as fine with me.

> Where the buttons automatically without scripting do the equivalent of
> the API function with the same name, and where the progress elements
> gets it's value from the video as it plays/gets buffered.

This poses a problem, the API would have to resemble the common UI  
controls closely. Elsewhere it seems consensus that the API should be  
as slim as possible.
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2007 05:57:37 UTC

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