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

[whatwg] <video> element feedback

From: Gareth Hay <gazhay@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 20:21:35 +0000
Message-ID: <FE599D47-BFC0-4C1F-90E2-B339C08907F2@gmail.com>
Are we speaking MIME type or tag here?

Looking at the list of issued MIME types, it seems pdf and ogg can  
fall under this category.
Under these conditions, I would imagine that <application> would be a  
download, where the author wants you to get the content, as opposed  
to stream it or view it in-place.

On 21 Mar 2007, at 19:50, Martin Atkins wrote:

> Gareth Hay wrote:
>> This is a bit of a sideways step here, but why not make tags  
>> reflect MIME type,
>> e.g.
>> <image>        image/*
>> <video>            video/*
>> <application>     application/*
>> <audio>            audio/*
>> That way we have a clear identification of what is going to be in  
>> the tag, API's can be tailored sufficiently for each one.
>> Each tag can have appropriate fallback also.
>> Just a thought, and it gets us out of the <object> hole.
>
> What do you imagine "application" being used for?
>
> The "application" type category is pretty-much just "miscellaneous".
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2007 13:21:35 UTC

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