- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 10:48:29 +0200
- To: "WHAT Working Group" <whatwg@whatwg.org>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 01:35:00 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Rick Waldron wrote: >> >> Also, at the time, the surface click to play was non-standard and >> incredibly annoying because it just "showed up" as someone's pet feature >> in Firefox. (I'm still not sure if it's a "standard" feature, I can't >> find anything in the spec about it, but I could've just missed it) > > It's not documented in the spec, but it seems reasonable. > On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Robert O'Callahan wrote: >> >> I think you basically have to assume that if you specify "controls" then >> the controls may accept clicks anywhere in the video element. There's >> nothing in the spec to say that the controls must be restricted to a bar >> of a certain height at the bottom of the element. > > True, but there _is_ something now that says that if the browser > considers > it the user interacting with a control, that there shouldn't be events > sent to the page. It's either a control (no events), or an activation > behaviour (click events, can be canceled by preventDefault()). Saying that Firefox's "click anywhere to play" isn't a control but rather activation behavior for the element makes sense. If other browsers want to implement that behavior, it would be good if the spec called out this difference. > Should we make this an explicit activation behaviour for the <video> > element if it has a controls="" attribute? That might be good so that the behavior is consistent between browsers. However, I think it should be conditional on whether the controls are visible rather than whether the controls attribute is present. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 08:41:42 UTC