- From: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 01:39:07 +1000
- To: Sigurd Lerstad <sigler@bredband.no>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Thursday, May 1, 2003, at 23:26 Australia/Canberra, Dean Jackson wrote: > > On Thu, 01 May 2003, Sigurd Lerstad wrote > >> *********************** >> 4.3.3 The video element >> The video element specifies a video file which is to be rendered to >> provide >> synchronised video. The usual SMIL animation elements are used to >> start and >> stop the video at the appropriate times. >> ************************* >> >> What does this mean? Wouldn't it be better if <video> was a timed >> element >> and had begin, dur etc. ? (just like in SMIL) > > This is a typo. We meant attributes not elements. > >> Does <video> have preserveAspectRatio, just like <image> ? >> >> Are <video> and <image> interchangeable elements, much like smil ? > > Yes, except for the animation attributes. My response is a little confused. I strictly meant "no" or "not at present, we're thinking about it". <video> references something that is implicitly timed media. <image> does not. But, thinking about it a little more, I'm not sure what you meant by "interchangeable". At the moment <svg:image> is not like the SMIL variety. Dean
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 11:39:17 UTC