- From: Sander van Zoest <sander@vanzoest.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:05:45 -0700
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Eric Carlson <eric.carlson at apple.com>wrote: > > On Oct 15, 2008, at 1:04 PM, Ralph Giles wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Sander van Zoest <sander at vanzoest.com> >> wrote: >> >> Following that logic, why add the attribute at all? >>> >> >> Well, I like the pixelaspect attribute because incorrect aspect ratios >> drive me up the wall. Because the video and its embedding page are >> often served from different locations, it's nice to have a way to fix >> it the doesn't require editing the video file. >> >> I agree that incorrectly encoded videos are annoying, but I don't think > we should have this attribute at all because I don't think it passes the > "will it be commonly used" smell test. > > I am also afraid that it will difficult to use correctly, since you > frequently have to use clean aperture in conjunction with pixel aspect ratio > to get the correct display size. For example (you probably know this, but > for the benefit of others following the discussion) DV NTSC video is > 720x480, has Rec.601 aspect ratio (10:11), and should be displayed at > 640x480. Multiplying 720x480 by 10:11 doesn't give 640x480 however, you have > to crop to clean aperture (704x480) first. We *definitely* don't want to > expose CLASP. > > I don't think it should be included in the first version of the spec. Certainly not. I forgot about the required crop. I am now even more convinced it doesn't belong in the spec. Let the container handle this detail. -- Sander -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20081015/2dfc55c0/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2008 15:05:45 UTC