- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 00:02:07 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Jer Noble <jer.noble@apple.com>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Jer Noble wrote: > >> > >> The overall purpose of the modifications is to achieve the following: > >> when controller.play() is called, all slaved media elements > >> unconditionally will begin playing. > > > > I don't think this is a good idea. If the user has paused one of the > > slaves, and then pauses and resumes the whole thing, the paused media > > element shouldn't resume. It should remain paused. (I meant author, not user, here.) > With JavaScript, it's certainly possible for a page author to play() or > pause() a slaved media element directly, but that author could just as > easily remove the media element from the media group / media controller. > > > [...] > > > > That only works if there's JavaScript doing the removing. The idea > > here is that this should all work even without any JS, just with UA > > UI. > > With just the UA UI, the behavior would be exactly the same [...] If you remove the element from the media controller, the media controller's timeline changes. It'll be quite common for there to be videos that are not currently playing, e.g. sign-language tracks. If we change anything here, I think it would be the currently required UI behaviour which requires all the videos to start playing when the user overrides the JS-provided controls and just uses the UA controls. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2012 00:02:38 UTC