- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 10:15:26 +0000 (UTC)
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Peter Kasting wrote: > > > > I don't understand why this attribute would cause problems. Can you > > elaborate? > > * Authors specify the wrong ratio, causing videos to look worse * > Authors, blindly copy-and-pasting, believe this attribute is required > and specify it everywhere, increasing the likelihood of both of these > bullet points > > If you think the likelihood of the first bullet is low, consider the > confusion evident on this thread, and then extend that to authors who > have even less of a clue. The attribute is confusing because your > intended use -- as a hack that people shouldn't use -- is confusing. > > Videos encoded at the wrong aspect ratio are a real problem, but they > are one of an extremely large number of real problems, most of which we > (rightly) are not trying to solve. I think you have given a few reasons > why we _aren't_ trying to solve others. I don't understand why we're > trying to solve this one. > > I don't think it is the end of the world if this attribute goes in, but > I see very little benefit to it, and I am always for removing items with > marginal utility. On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Chris Double wrote: > > I'm inclined to agree. I think it's odd that an attribute is being added > to fix video's encoded incorrectly. Why can't the author of the video > fix the actual video? > > One of the arguments for captions being embedded in video's rather than > having some way of defining captions by the page author was that it's > important not to use HTML to fix broken videos, and allow captions to > travel with the file. The same argument could be made for pixel ratio. > Fixing it in the HTML means everyone linking to the file using <video> > will need to remember to add pixelratio to their HTML. Better to fix the > file. On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > Ah, makes sense. Wasn't there once upon a time a CSS draft that let you > specify how replaced elements should stretch in situations like this? So > you could choose if it should zoom-to-fit (like it sounds like <video> > does) or stretch-to-fit (like <img> does), zoom-to-fill as well as a few > other things. I can't seem to find it though... > > I guess my point is, can we let CSS deal with this? If it indeed needs > to be dealt with. Fair enough. I've removed the pixelratio attribute. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 1 December 2008 02:15:26 UTC