[whatwg] Codecs for <audio> and <video> -- informative note?

Adam Shannon ashannon1000 at gmail.com
Mon Jul 6 11:45:35 PDT 2009

The spec (at least from what I know) wants to create a unified experience,
we don't want users to have a different experience from browser to browser.
Nor do developers want to implement hacks for every browser.  If no common
ground can be reached then maybe no common ground is better than common
ground, who knows it may spark new ideas that we haven't thought of yet.

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Aryeh Gregor
<Simetrical+w3c at gmail.com<Simetrical%2Bw3c at gmail.com>
> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:01 AM, David Gerard<dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > A spec that makes an encumbered format a "SHOULD" is unlikely to be
> > workable for those content providers, e.g. Wikimedia, who don't have
> > the money, and won't under principle, to put up stuff in a format
> > rendered radioactive by known enforced patents.
> That's why "should" is not the same as "must".  Those who have a good
> reason not to do it can decline to do it.

- Adam Shannon ( http://ashannon.us )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090706/401d33f3/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the whatwg mailing list