[whatwg] Codecs (was Re: Apple Proposal for Timed Media Elements)
gazhay at gmail.com
Fri Mar 23 05:31:41 PDT 2007
I defer on the legal side, i really do,
On 23 Mar 2007, at 12:18, Christian F.K. Schaller wrote:
> I mean what have we truly achieved if the new VIDEO element means that
> web page developers still have to support Windows Media for Windows
> clients, MPEG4 for Apple systems and Ogg for Linux/Unix systems? I
> in that case most web developers would be more than happy to just
> to using flash video, at least they can get away with encoding once
> have a decent chance of all platforms supporting it.
For the <video> tag to work in the situation you describe, across
platforms and browsers means introducing a codec into the spec.
*If* this is possible, it then depends on browser developers
following the spec,
*If* they do that, it is still possible for developers to use the
video they already have encoded, in the new video tag (as I can't see
a video tag working if you *require* a specific codec for all
content), to the exclusion of those who's UA don't support it, and a
lot of people will only care if it works in IE.
I'm with you, we should aim for the sky, I just think there are too
many road blocks in the way.
More information about the whatwg