- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:58:36 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Philip J?genstedt wrote: > > > > The idea is that if you set the override to a 1:2 ratio, then each > > pixel of video data will be rendered 1:2. So you first have to > > normalise the width, getting rid of the influence of the "official" > > pixel ratio. No? > > I understand what the intention is, but think the terminology is > confusing: > > - width given by the resource itself > - height given by the resource itself > -??? pixel ratio given by the resource itself > > I had thought that these 3 were actually orthogonal, such that the pixel > ratio does not affect the width or the height. Instead, it seems that > width/height is supposed to be aspect ratio pre-multiplied. This doesn't > sit well with my intuition of what the "self-given" width/height of > video is supposed to mean. If you open video in common media players the > "dimensions" or "width/height" will be the physical width/height, not > aspect-corrected width/height. Unless my intuition is severely broken, I > think other will also assume what I have assumed. I've tried to make the spec generally much more explicit about this. Please let me know if the spec makes more sense now. I can definitely still change the terminology if you think it is still confusing. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2008 14:58:36 UTC