[whatwg] Some <video> questions
oliver at apple.com
Wed Jan 30 13:23:00 PST 2008
On 30/01/2008, at 12:54 PM, Charles wrote:
> Thanks for the conversation, folks!
> I was hoping that <video> would make Objecty <http://wiltgen.net/
> objecty/> redundant by making it easy for authors to embed video in
> a very simple, normalized fashion across formats, browsers and
> OSs. Now I understand that <video> will be considered successful
> without having fixed video embeddeding in general, which is fine.
What part of video does it not fix? It defines a standard API for
all implementers, with standard html-native markup.
Afaict you just want to be able to replace your use of <object> with
<video> which is entirely pointless, the purpose of the video tag is
to provide a standardised native html element, not another plugin
mechanism to replace <object> -- by definition a plugin is both non-
native and non-standard so has no relevance here.
Once the spec is complete you'll be able to use standard html to say
here is a video, then use JS to bind custom controls (if you so
desire), and everything will be wholesome and good. If you want to
use a plugin use <object> that's what <object> is for.
>> Microsoft provides a QuickTime component for Windows Media; would
>> that not be sufficient?
> Unfortunately not. There's the installed base problem we've talked
> about a lot in the thread, plus Flip4Mac WM doesn't support all
> Windows Media features. Really, it was always just a stop-gap
> until Silverlight.
> -- Charles
More information about the whatwg