W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2011

[whatwg] HTML5 video: frame accuracy / SMPTE

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 09:49:54 +1300
Message-ID: <AANLkTik2OnOpknW0JQWXrgr4J8bxBqetXXpwAKVUm-8e@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Philip J?genstedt <philipj at opera.com>wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:10:21 +0100, Robert O'Callahan <
> robert at ocallahan.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Interesting. It doesn't in Firefox; script always sees a snapshot of a
>> consistent state until it returns to the event loop or does something
>> modal
>> (although audio, and soon video, will continue to play while script runs).
>> I'm not sure if the spec should require that ... overall our APIs try
>> pretty
>> hard not to expose races to JS.
>>
>
> How does that work? Do you take a copy of all properties that could
> possibly change during script execution, including ones that create a new
> object, like buffered and seekable?


All script-accessible state exists on the main thread (the thread that runs
the event loop), and is updated via asynchronous messages from decoder and
playback threads as necessary. 'buffered' is always in sync since data
arrival and eviction from the media data cache happen on the main thread.
(That cache can be read from other threads though.)

If you instead only make a copy on the first read, isn't it still possible
> to get an inconsistent state, e.g. where currentTime isn't in the buffered
> ranges?
>

No, this wouldn't happen, although it might be possible for currentTime to
be outside the buffered ranges for other reasons.

How about HTMLImageElement.complete, which the spec explicitly says can
> change during script execution?
>

Interesting, I didn't know about that.

In any case, it sounds like either HTMLMediaElement is underspecified or one
> of us has interpreted in incorrectly, some interop on this point would be
> nice.


Maybe. If the spec is clarified to allow races when accessing media element
state, I guess it won't be the end of the world, although I predict interop
difficulties. But that's always an easy prediction! :-)

The biggest use case is clicking a seek bar and ending up somewhere close
> enough, but yes, being able to do fast relative seeking is a nice bonus.
> Maybe we should do what many media frameworks do and use a "reference"
> parameter, defining what the seek is relative to. Usually you can seek
> relative to the beginning, end and current position, but perhaps we could
> reduce that to just "absolute" and "relative". That's a bit less magic than
> inspecting currentTime when the method is called.
>
> So far:
>
> seek(t, ref, how);
>
> ref is "absolute" (default) or "relative"
>
> how is "accurate" (default) or "fast"
>
> (or numeric enums, if that's what DOM interfaces usually have)


That works.

Rob
-- 
"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]
Received on Monday, 24 January 2011 12:49:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:30 UTC