- From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2010 05:07:11 +0300
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote: > This latter one is already defined as a 5 sec video extract from the > full file.ogv - it's not possible to overload that with turning the > byte range into an animated gif. So, <img> isn't restricted to animated GIFs, Mozilla supports animated PNGs (APNG), and some browsers support MNG. To some extent, there's nothing wrong with using a video file as an image, or an animated image. I'm not absolutely certain i'd want to see it used this way, but I can understand why someone would ask for it. > You will also need to use transcoding > for this and thus will want to create a new URI query scheme. As <img> doesn't require that animations be GIF based, there's no need for transcoding. There would be a requirement for browsers to choose to support the proposed format, but ...
Received on Saturday, 3 July 2010 19:07:11 UTC