[whatwg] Video proposals

Robert Brodrecht whatwg at robertdot.org
Fri Mar 16 15:15:59 PDT 2007

Andrew Sidwell said:
> <flash> would be a poor choice of
> something to put in a spec, simply because its use case is already
> handled by <object>.

I wouldn't say it that way.  I'd say "because flash requires a browser
plugin, we use object."  Video is already handled by <object> but we don't
want it to be any more.  So, when you substitute "flash" with "video" in
your sentence above, it is self-defeating.  The reason Flash ought to stay
in the object tag is because it is proprietary and requires a plugin.  If
Flash is ever open and freely available from Adobe, then <flash> might not
be such a bad idea.  Several video formats, on the other hand, are
supported by major operating systems natively, and there is no need to
have web developers jumping through hoops to use it.  The theora codec, I
assume, would be contained inside the browser itself, thus making it one
format that would certainly be cross-browser and cross-platform whether
the OS supported it or not.

Robert <http://robertdot.org>

More information about the whatwg mailing list