[whatwg] The issue of interoperability of the <video> element
mk98762 at gmail.com
Mon Jun 25 10:22:35 PDT 2007
"Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>No need to encode as a java applet - all you need to do is put the
>java applet on the server together with your Ogg Theora content. And -
>by all means - this is not supposed to be an end solution, but just a
>fix to bridge the gap until all Browsers support the baseline codec.
I don't understand why Java is needed client side if content can be
authored as <video src="myvid.mpg"></video>, but this isn't the place to
explain what I presume it is caused by my lack of understanding of Java.
My main worry relates to the usability and accessibility of future audio
and video web content. Content including the wrapping should be free, to
consume, to serve, to manipulate and to create. That basic principle
should make it possible to write, publish and distribute free clients
and authoring software. Combined this is imo of great importance to
keep the threshold as low as possible to what might become the most
extensive resource of human knowledge and communication. Audio and video
are no longer peripheral in that pool of knowledge and communication,
they are essential.
Support in clients with a small market share like Opera and Safari is
imo unlikely to be a significant consideration for content creators when
deciding which encoding format to use. MS and Mozilla with their ,
combined ~95% of the market will probably determine what will be used.
Opera and Safari will probably have to follow suit if they can. If IE
and Mozilla support a common codec, and if that codec roughly meets the
quality vs bandwidth requirements of content providers then imo there's
a high probability that this format will be used to create future audio
and video web content.
Anyone know if Microsoft and Mozilla have expressed their wishes and
More information about the whatwg