W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2010

[whatwg] HTML 5 : The Youtube response

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 07:31:20 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikc__HfZtauZSS4mM8vs_nQPjzB3BNE3d-Knmvj@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 2:35 AM, schalk <schalk at ossreleasefeed.com> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Has anyone/everyone read the blog entry on Youtube?s blog
> (http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html) regarding their
> feeling about HTML5 video and why they still feel that Flash for video is the
> preferred choice? I must say I do share some of their points. My question is,
> what work is being done to remedy these points at the moment?

So, for a quick recap, their problems are:

1. Standard video format
2. Robust video streaming
3. Content Protection
4. Encapsulation + embedding
5. Fullscreen video
6. Camera and Microphone access

The blog itself successfully covers the current responses to 1, 2, 5,
and 6.  #3 is a different story; it doesn't appear that anyone in this
space is working on that or intends to.  And I'm happy with that.  #4
is kind of silly - flash embedding doesn't protect anyone's private
data - the plugin can do plenty of malicious stuff if it wants to.
Spreading videos by embedding <script> tags would be equally safe.  I
think people just don't realize that fact.  In any case, embedding
videos via <iframe sandbox=allow-scripts> should work fine, once more
browsers support it.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 30 June 2010 07:31:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:24 UTC