- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 05:17:55 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Kevin Calhoun wrote: > > I've been evaluating the behavior of the HTMLMediaElement in the current > working draft in light of the various network protocols and player > behaviors that I'm familiar with, and I think the current specification > of loading behavior and the definitions of the buffering, buffered, and > bufferingRate attributes are too restrictive. > > Players can be divided roughly into two classes according to their > handling of data transfer: > > 1. Data availability precedes playability, seekability, etc. > > Typical case: the client requests a media resource via a transfer > protocol such as http and caches the data it receives. It defers > playback until enough of the resource is cached for playback to proceed > without interruption. Seeking is limited to the range of the media > that's available locally. > > 2. Data is loaded on demand in response to a request to perform an > operation, e.g. play or seek > > Typical case: in response to a request to play a media resource, the > client negotiates with a server to initiate a streaming session, such as > an rtp session. Playback proceeds as soon as a minimal amount of data is > buffered. Seeking may occur within the full range of the media; when it > occurs the client asks the server to stream from the new media time. > > Of course many variants and elaborations of these two strategies are > possible. In particular I don't mean to suggest that file transfer > protocols are suitable only for the former category or that streaming > protocols are suitable only for the latter. > > In the discussions that led to Apple's proposal for media states we made > an effort to accommodate a variety of media access protocols. For > example, in order to permit appropriate restrictions on seeking > operations we expose the notion of the range of media that's available, > not the range of media that's buffered, and leave the definition of > "availability" up to the UA to accord with the transfer protocol and > caching scheme in use. We also tried to stay away from the term > "download", as it implies a file transfer. > > Clearly the two broad classes I mention above are very general; would it > be helpful to discuss player behaviors in more depth? How well does the > current proposal succeed in allowing custom controllers to be > implemented that work with a variety of protocols? As far as I can tell, both of the cases above are in fact handled by the current specification. Could you elaborate on how you think the current spec is too restrictive? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 12 October 2007 22:17:55 UTC