[whatwg] Scripted querying of <video> capabilities
giecrilj at stegny.2a.pl
Wed Aug 20 06:10:35 PDT 2008
No, no, and no.
Mass complaints about _supposedly_ incompatible Web content from incompetent
end users would only cause me, as the author, to file a complaint with the
browser vendor. The browser should not pretend it is omniscient and it can
teach everyone around.
Browser vendors can and should agree on the basic constructs and provide the
relevant publisher's documentation for the good of the Web; advertising the
competitors' products would be an unreasonable requirement.
I am unwilling to help my browser vendor get the page that works for me
display correctly in another product I do not intend to use. The warning is
obtrusive, it warns about something immaterial and it bears a slight
resemblance to a chain letter.
From: whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of timeless
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 2:29 PM
To: WHATWG List
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Scripted querying of <video> capabilities
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Kristof Zelechovski
<giecrilj at stegny.2a.pl> wrote:
> Only the user that actually encounters a Web site deficiency should report
> it to the creator/owner (assuming they provided a reverse link).
> Otherwise such a report should be ignored as a supposition.
mass complaints work better.
> Why should browser vendors bother that some pages do not display correctly
> in other browsers?
for the good of the web.
> This is a validator's job, and a validator is an authoring tool.
i highly doubt this will work.
> That would mean supporting your competitor, wouldn't it?
can't we all get along and work for a better web?
but yes, it would mean helping your own engine on another profile
which might not support the same features.
More information about the whatwg