- From: Tim Hutt <tdhutt@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:41:23 +0000
On 17 February 2010 03:05, Conrad Parker <conrad at metadecks.org> wrote: >> My point exactly. There is no single 'quality' metric, so the best we >> can do is give the user agent the relevant information and let it >> decide. > > Perhaps, but why are you suggesting that HTML is the correct place to > offer that information? > > For handling bitrate selection (and bitrate adaptation) I think it's > more useful to provide a resource description file, under control of > the video host, as the video source URL. Good point. You mean something like a .ram file? I think both techniques should be supported -- a metadata file is extra hassle to set up if you /are/ the HTML and video author, and it involves an extra file download which will slow things down. Maybe something like: <video src="many_files.sources"> Which is equivalent to <video> [the contents of many_files.sources (which optionally contains bitrate and resolution tags)] </video> Obviously this shouldn't be implemented like #include because that would be insecure. Instead the UA would parse the file and make sure it only contained <source> tags.
Received on Thursday, 18 February 2010 09:41:23 UTC