[whatwg] Some <video> questions

> What part of video does it not fix?

It fixes the problem for formats supported by the player(s) that a
particular browser vendor thinks is important.  That's good as far as it
goes, don't get me wrong.

I understand Apple's POV is that cascading source elements makes the debate
moot.

Unfortunately, content providers usually can't provide the same content in
different formats -- either it's too expensive to re-author a similar
experience for multiple formats, or functionality they need isn't available
in multiple formats, or it's too costly to create server farms for multiple
formats, etc.

History shows us that even when they can, they don't.

> Afaict you just want to be able to replace your use of <object>
> with <video> which is entirely pointless...

Semantically, you don't want web video (regardless of format) to be marked
up as <video>?

> Once the spec is complete you'll be able to use standard html to
> say here is a video, then use JS to bind custom controls (if you
> so desire), and everything will be wholesome and good.  

Again, that's great for what it is.

-- Charles

Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2008 17:01:27 UTC