[whatwg] Codecs for <audio> and <video>
pkasting at google.com
Tue Jun 30 12:39:05 PDT 2009
There is no other reason to put a codec in the spec -- the primary reason to
spec a behavior (to document vendor consensus) does not apply. "Some
vendors agreed, and some objected violently" is not "consensus".
On Jun 30, 2009 12:31 PM, "Jeff McAdams" <jeffm at iglou.com> wrote:
Peter Kasting wrote: > > As a contributor to multiple browsers, I think it's
important to note the d...
I don't know that anyone has suggested putting it in the spec *only* to
apply pressure to vendors. Certainly that is an added "bonus" (I'll put
that in quotes because not everyone will consider that a positive thing),
and certainly doing so will achieve the goal of applying pressure. But I
agree that putting it in the spec to *only* apply pressure to vendors is not
reasonable, but considering it as an additional reason to put it in the
spec, is quite reasonable.
-- Jeff McAdams jeffm at iglou.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the whatwg