- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:49:06 -0800
On Jan 31, 2008, at 3:01 PM, Charles wrote: >> Inserting a [SWF] file into a video element is similar to inserting >> an HTML file that happens to have a link to video: sure, it links >> to a video, but it does a billion other things too - it isn't >> in itself the video. > > I hear you. FWIW, here's a QuickTime Movie that's also not in > itself the > video: http://wiltgen.net/tempy/badder.mov > > Please pardon the content. It's what I had handy from some previous > testing. :^) > > Sementically that Movie *is* video (even though technially it > contains no > media), and so it seems desirable to want to embed it using > <video>. And > we'll be able to in Safari, but not IE. Or at least, I'm pretty > confident > that Apple won't be packaging QuickTime as DirectShow filters. > > Imagine the QuickTime plug-in being able to register itself with > IE's brower > as a handler for <video> types that IE otherwise wouldn't handle. > That > seems like a very desirable thing, but the more we talk the more it > seems > outside the scope of what HTML5 can solve. If IE implemented <video> based on DirectShow, then it seems there would already be a way for Apple to do that (write a DirectShow filter). I can't promise either way that Apple would or wouldn't provide extended video codecs to IE's <video>, but I don't think the decision will depend deeply on whether the relevant API is ActiveX or DirectShow or something else. Regards, Maciej
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2008 16:49:06 UTC