[whatwg] on codecs in a 'video' tag.

[Anne van Kesteren]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:41:28 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi at gmx.net>  
wrote:
> * Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Also, I think the HTML specification should mandate (as SHOULD-level
>> requirement, probably) support for the various supported image formats  
>> as it gives a clear indication of what authors can rely on and what user
>> agents have to implement in order to support the web.
>
> And you think this should be in the "HTML specification" rather than
> some dedicated technologies-that-should-be-implemented-by-visual-desk-
> top-browsers specification why exactly? Such a "SHOULD" would not apply
> to many "HTML implementations" and not easy to specify (you do not want
> to require full JPEG support, for example, and an authoring tool might
> not support GIF), so you have a SHOULD with many exceptions, decreasing
> the normative force of all other SHOULD-level requirements.

I forgot to mention that I think the requirement should only apply to the  
web browser conformance class. It indeed doesn't make much sense for a lot  
of other user agents.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>