<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 2010-09-20 05:27, Chris Pearce wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4C96D49B.1030202@pearce.org.nz" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
Right, so you want to be able to toggle the poster back on (when
the media is paused or ended) but after playback has started.<br>
<br>
I wonder if these are separate use cases, e.g. whether users would
want to display a different image from the poster image in these
cases. i.e. I wonder if we need to provide an attribute to specify
an image to display when paused and another new attribute for an
image to display when playback has ended. I wonder if that's
overkill through.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
No no no! Read my previous post why a "paused poster" is bad idea
unless done exactly as I suggested there.<br>
A "paused poster" should under no circumstance "steal" the paused
frame, the user may actually want to look closer at the pause frame,
if a "paused poster" force itself to be displayed the user will be
pretty pissed. (I certainly would be)<br>
The video streaming service Voddler is an annoying example of this,
pause the movie in their player and an ad is shown, although I
understand why they wish to show an ad, it does makes it impossible
to pause and look at the still frame of the video. <br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Roger "Rescator" Hågensen.
Freelancer - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://EmSai.net/">http://EmSai.net/</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>