W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2008

[whatwg] Some <video> questions

From: Charles <lists07@wiltgen.net>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 10:18:22 -0700
Message-ID: <013901c8ac78$87b331e0$971995a0$@net>
Not sure why you're responding to a 3-month-old email or what "Turing
complete" has to do with anything (the QuickTime runtime is also Turing
complete), but feel free to ping me off-list if you have questions.

-- Charles

-----Original Message-----
From: K?i?tof ?elechovski [mailto:giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl] 
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 7:45 AM
To: 'Charles'; 'WHAT working group'
Subject: RE: [whatwg] Some <video> questions

I am not sure what you had in mind.  It seems irrelevant whether the video
stream is embedded or linked from another location or using a different
transport; it is still a video stream and the QuickTime player only displays
it.  On the other hand, Shockwave Flash is Turing-complete.  That is a big
difference.  I am very disappointed.

-----Original Message-----
From: whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 6:50 AM
To: 'WHAT working group'
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Some <video> questions

> Your movie showed as a grey square and hanged Internet Explorer and I had
to log out.  Was that intended?

It's an ordinary QuickTime Movie and works fine.

The content is irrelevant, but it shows that the files one will embed with
<video> often won't actually contain any video media.  This will be the case
with every metafile format (.asx, .sdp, etc.), and nearly all modern
container formats (.mov, .asf, .swf) that can reference media that lives

-- Charles
Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 10:18:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:02 UTC