[html5] VIDEO rendering (from: OGG--Why vs)
rob at sanchothefat.com
Fri Dec 14 04:34:39 PST 2007
Jon Barnett wrote:
> On Dec 13, 2007 1:17 PM, Nathan Ziarek <nziarek at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would agree with the idea of a pipe dream, unfortunately. Who creates the
>> browser media player? Who creates the various codecs for the media player?
>> Media has become a pretty political issue -- and I don't see an easy route
>> to the centralized video player.
>> I like the idea of a video and audio standard on the web, but with no clear
>> winner in the marketplace, I sure wouldn't want to be the person making that
> At the risk of drifting off-topic.
> Flash. It's the elephant in the room. There is a reason that YouTube
> and all its clones and almost all social networking sites that host
> videos use Flash wrappers, not to mention that most amateur web sites
> that want to put a video on a page just upload the video to a
> YouTube-like site and copy/paste the HTML code. It's the clear winner
> in the marketplace, but you said otherwise because no one wants to
> mention the elephant in the room.
> Flash is already cross-platform and supported in nearly every browser.
> Even mobile platforms are beginning to use it. It came preinstalled
> on the Wii browser, but not on the DS browser. Even iPhone may soon
> support it. (I don't know how iPhone is supporting YouTube without
> Flash - I assume it's playing the FLV files directly since YouTube is
> using MPEG-4 for video.)
> One major problem with Flash (ignoring that it's proprietary, blah
> blah blah), is that even today, you can't just point the Flash Player
> to an FLV file. You have to create an SWF file that embed the FLV
> file and the video controls. Of course, many sites use this to their
> advantage - after the video is finished playing they can show
> thumbnails and link to other videos from within the SWF file.
> If you want to break Flash's dominance on the web (for videos), you'll
> have to outdo its features. Since YouTube can embed those thumbnails
> and links at the end of a movie, your new open-source-standard-happy
> player will need to be that flexible as well.
> We could hope/ask for Adobe to open up SWF as a standard. There are
> third-party, open-source libs for making SWF files - I assume they
> don't break any patents. I just don't know how far you'll get that
> route, though.
> We could make FLV+MPEG-4+AAC the recommended format, but since Flash
> won't play that file directly (at least today), we still have one
> <object> tag for flash and another <video> tag for the browser.
> converting it to a <object> that loads an SWF with a set of
> parameters. With a little more work, you might be able to support the
> DOM API for the video element on top of that. Also, the browser could
> do this purely transparently.
> But if you want a single standard media player supported by all
> browsers ... that's not Flash, market forces are going to make that a
> pipe dream.
> I don't guess I have a single point here, but I we can't discuss the
> pipe dream of standard video players, video formats, and video codecs
> without discussing the elephant in the room.
> I do think we should recommend a codec that Flash supports since that
> will be the easiest to implement and won't fight against the existing
You're right, I had flash in mind all the time I was just trying to
explain myself. I don't think Flash can ever be replaced because of it's
flexibility. Maybe in time combinations of canvas + video + audio +
scripting will be a contender.
Anyway, I missed it off before when I was scanning the spec but I like
what it has to say about the DOM interface for <video> it and how it
could work, makes perfect sense. Just curious now from a design
perspective what could be done without scripting. Is discussion of how
CSS would apply beyond the scope of this mailing list or is
whatwg at whatwg.org more appropriate?
More information about the Help