[whatwg] Serving up Theora <video> in the real world
philipj at opera.com
Sat Jul 11 02:38:12 PDT 2009
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:35:22 +0200, Robert O'Callahan
<robert at ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Philip Jagenstedt
> <philipj at opera.com>wrote:
>> the point is simply that calling canPlayType without out a codecs list
>> with specific codecs, you can learn exactly what is supported and not
>> out of
>> the container formats and codecs you are interested in, without the
>> need for
>> the strange "probably"/"maybe"/"" API.
> I think it would be somewhat counterintuitive for
> to return true, but canPlayType("video/ogg; codecs=dirac") to return
Well I disagree of course, because having canPlayType("video/ogg") mean
anything else than "can I demux Ogg streams" is pointless.
Quoting myself from
(replies from Ian)
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
> When asking about application/ogg, this could mean 2 things:
>1. "can I demux Ogg streams?"
> 2. "can I demux Ogg streams and decode unknown codecs?"
It's the second (and thus the answer can only ever be "maybe" or "no").
> Unless the codecs parameter is to be made mandatory I think that spec
> should explicitly make it such that the question asked is 1. In either
> case we will end up there because 2 is not a meaningful question anduser
> agents will make untruthful answers in attempts to stay compatiblewith
> unknown and future content (which might be supported by installingnew
> codecs in the media framework without upgrading the browser).
Currently the spec says we should interpret canPlayType("video/ogg") as
"can I demux Ogg streams and decode unknown codecs?", which is a pointless
question. If we seriously believe that people need the level of control
provided by the 3-state answer, just let them make several queries to ask
the precise questions they want to ask.
More information about the whatwg