- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:10:45 -0400
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Kit Grose <kit at iqmultimedia.com.au> wrote: > Can I get some sort of an understanding on why this behaviour (non- > descript error in supported UAs rather than using the fallback content > that can provide alternate access methods) would be preferred? Suppose browsers fell back to the contents if they couldn't play any of the sources. Then what happens if the browser isn't sure whether it can play a video until it's started loading it? This would be extremely common -- it would happen any time the source is given with src="", or if <source> elements are given with no type="", or even if there was a type="" but the browser wasn't sure it supported the exact versions or didn't fully trust the author or whatnot. Then does the browser not load the contents until it figures out it can't play the video, then load the contents at some undefined later time? So scripts execute out of order and so on? Or should the browser be forced to block further rendering of the page until it knows for sure whether it can play one of the videos? This might require it to fetch the metadata of several videos, probably slowing down page load considerably. This is a bad solution as well, especially since in the long term, one would hope that some baseline format would be supported by all major browsers and provided by all pages, so the forced wait would usually be pointless. If you suggest requiring type="", and forcing browsers to guess whether they support the video based on that, what happens if the browser guesses yes and it turns out not to be able to play the video after all? Then you're back to the same unpredictable injection of content post-load. This is not even mentioning what happens if the list of <source> elements changes after page load. That could probably be handled. But the above problems are pretty hard to avoid, as far as I can tell. So for now, you have to either double-encode or rely on JavaScript. If this is too much of a sacrifice for you, then you should probably wait a few years before you start using <video>, until support is better -- for most authors it probably won't be pragmatically worth it until <video> support is so good that fallback isn't necessary anymore.
Received on Tuesday, 27 October 2009 19:10:45 UTC