Re: [whatwg] createObjectURL(stream) protocol issue

2011-08-12 Thread ᛏᚮᛘᛘᚤ
Imho conceptually streamed media is not the same as data from a file and thus should be separated. Specifically the code for the video tag for example now has to ask around what this URL actually points to before taking action. /Tommy On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 22:08, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch

Re: [whatwg] Proposal for a MediaSource API that allows sending media data to a HTMLMediaElement

2011-08-12 Thread Aaron Colwell
Hi Mark, comments inline... On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Mark Watson wats...@netflix.com wrote: I think it would be good if the API recognized the fact that the media data may becoming from several different original files/streams (e.g. different bitrates) as the player adapts to network

Re: [whatwg] createObjectURL(stream) protocol issue

2011-08-12 Thread Ian Hickson
On Fri, 12 Aug 2011, Tommy Widenflycht (�~[~O�~Z��~[~X�~[~X�~Z�) wrote: Imho conceptually streamed media is not the same as data from a file and thus should be separated. Specifically the code for the video tag for example now has to ask around what this URL actually points to before

Re: [whatwg] Fixing undo on the Web - UndoManager and Transaction

2011-08-12 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 11-08-11 6:07 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Ryosuke Niwarn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Ehsan Akhgarieh...@mozilla.com wrote: I think the confusion is arising because you chose to attach undoManager to elements, not nodes. Note that

Re: [whatwg] Fixing undo on the Web - UndoManager and Transaction

2011-08-12 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 11-08-09 6:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Ryosuke Niwarn...@webkit.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Jonas Sickingjo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think it's a matter of which use cases can or can't be solved with either solution. It's pretty clear to

Re: [whatwg] Fixing undo on the Web - UndoManager and Transaction

2011-08-12 Thread Ryosuke Niwa
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Ehsan Akhgari eh...@mozilla.com wrote: On 11-08-09 6:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: Sure, your API is more convenient in certain situations. But it also encourages code duplication (I'll note that in the examples you originally provided in this thread you always

Re: [whatwg] Fixing undo on the Web - UndoManager and Transaction

2011-08-12 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 11-08-12 6:10 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Ehsan Akhgarieh...@mozilla.com wrote: On 11-08-09 6:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: Sure, your API is more convenient in certain situations. But it also encourages code duplication (I'll note that in the examples you

Re: [whatwg] Fixing undo on the Web - UndoManager and Transaction

2011-08-12 Thread Ryosuke Niwa
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Ehsan Akhgari eh...@mozilla.com wrote: On 11-08-12 6:10 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: But having authors add flag in almost all cases isn't that nice either. Why do you think that authors need to specify the flag in almost all cases? Because almost all text

Re: [whatwg] createObjectURL(stream) protocol issue

2011-08-12 Thread Darin Fisher
Putting implementation details aside, I agree that it is a bit unfortunate to refer to a stream as a blob. So far, blobs have always referred to static, fixed-size things. This function was originally named createBlobURL, but it was renamed createObjectURL precisely because we imagined it being