Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 18/01/2011 4:59 p.m., Roger Hågensen wrote: Unbuffering: It may sound odd but in low storage space situations, it may be necessary to unbuffer what has been played. Is this supported at all currently? Firefox caches media data locally on disk, and will evict data which is unlikely to be

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 2011-01-18 01:30, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 1/17/11 6:04 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: From a user's perspective (which is what I'm speaking as here), it doesn't matter what the technology is. The point is that there is prevalent UI out there right now where pausing a moving will keep buffering it

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 1/17/11 6:04 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: From a user's perspective (which is what I'm speaking as here), it doesn't matter what the technology is. The point is that there is prevalent UI out there right now where pausing a moving will keep buffering it up and then you can watch it later. This is

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 1/17/11 4:25 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: That's an important use case, but it feels like a very different one. From a user's point of view it's really not. If you want to download hours of video for playing offline, you don't want to store that in a transient read-ahead buffer--you want to st

Re: [whatwg] Fwd: RE: Inconsistent behaviour of globalCompositeOperation property - Drawing model discussion

Since Jan 5 I have refined my proposal. It now looks like this: I propose changing the drawing model steps 2 to 5 the following way: Step 2: Multiply the alpha channel of every pixel in A by globalAlpha. (Prior Step 5) Step 3: When shadows are drawn

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Chris Pearce wrote: > On 18/01/2011 8:05 a.m., Zachary Ozer wrote: >> >> What no one has mentioned so far is that the real issue isn't the >> network utilization or the memory capacity of the devices, it's >> bandwidth cost. >> >> The big issue for publishers is th

Re: [whatwg] Fwd: RE: Inconsistent behaviour of globalCompositeOperation property - Drawing model discussion

On 1/17/2011 1:47 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:05 PM, > wrote: Given the statements above I no longer think that changing the spec in this regard is a good thing, but I still believe that the disappearance of shadows for the so

Re: [whatwg] Fwd: RE: Inconsistent behaviour of globalCompositeOperation property - Drawing model discussion

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:05 PM, wrote: > > Given the statements above I no longer think that changing the spec in this > regard is a good thing, but I still believe that the disappearance of > shadows for the source-in and copy modes and the strange result when shadows > are drawn and the compos

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: >> >> > If nothing else, I'm thinking things like "I would like to buffer up >> this >> > 3-hour-long-video so I can watch it o

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

One solution that could work here is to honour dynamic changes to 'preload', so switching preload to 'none' would stop buffering. Then a script could do that, for example, after the user has paused the video for ten seconds. The script could also look at 'buffered' to make its decision. Rob -- "N

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > I disagree. If we don't address this use case, users can't watch videos > offline unless content providers explicitly provide such a mechanism using > File API, which will undermine usability significantly. > This seems like something that

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Chris Pearce wrote: > Can this not be implemented on the server side? If you know the media has > an average playback rate of X KB/s, can the server reliably throttle its > transmission at 1.5X? > Yes, it seems to me that if you simply throttle the rate at which

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > > If nothing else, I'm thinking things like "I would like to buffer up this > > 3-hour-long-video so I can watch it on the plane, where my network > bandwidth > > will be precisely 0

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Chris Pearce wrote: > On 18/01/2011 10:05 a.m., Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >> >> If instead the bandwidth is the limiting factor, we do want to allow >> buffering ahead a fair bit such that we don't end up in a "buffering" >> state for the user too often. In this case

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > If nothing else, I'm thinking things like "I would like to buffer up this > 3-hour-long-video so I can watch it on the plane, where my network bandwidth > will be precisely 0". Definitely as use case I've had. > That's an important use cas

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 1/17/11 4:05 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >> >> Assuming a browser is able to play back video in realtime, i.e. their >> CPU and download bandwidth are sufficient to download video data at or >> above the speed it is required in to provide

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 1/17/11 4:05 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: Assuming a browser is able to play back video in realtime, i.e. their CPU and download bandwidth are sufficient to download video data at or above the speed it is required in to provide continuous playback ... and that both conditions will continue for

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 18/01/2011 10:05 a.m., Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: If instead the bandwidth is the limiting factor, we do want to allow buffering ahead a fair bit such that we don't end up in a "buffering" state for the user too often. In this case, a dependency on the playback rate as suggested by Petr might mak

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 18/01/2011 8:05 a.m., Zachary Ozer wrote: What no one has mentioned so far is that the real issue isn't the network utilization or the memory capacity of the devices, it's bandwidth cost. The big issue for publishers is that they're incurring higher costs when using the tag, which is a disin

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Roger Hågensen wrote: > On 2011-01-17 18:36, Markus Ernst wrote: >> >> Am 17.01.2011 17:41 schrieb Jeroen Wijering: >>> >>> We are getting some questions from JW Player users that HTML5 video is >>> quite wasteful on bandwidth for longer videos (think 10min+). This

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

What no one has mentioned so far is that the real issue isn't the network utilization or the memory capacity of the devices, it's bandwidth cost. The big issue for publishers is that they're incurring higher costs when using the tag, which is a disincentive for adoption. Since there are situatio

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 2011-01-17 18:36, Markus Ernst wrote: Am 17.01.2011 17:41 schrieb Jeroen Wijering: We are getting some questions from JW Player users that HTML5 video is quite wasteful on bandwidth for longer videos (think 10min+). This because browsers download the entire movie once playback starts, regar

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

Hi! > A suggestion would be to implement / expose a property called > "downloadBufferTarget". It would be the amount of video in seconds the > browser tries to keep in the download buffer. I think this really is a policy decision that should be in the hands of the user. But overally, it is

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

Am 17.01.2011 17:41 schrieb Jeroen Wijering: Hello all, We are getting some questions from JW Player users that HTML5 video is quite wasteful on bandwidth for longer videos (think 10min+). This because browsers download the entire movie once playback starts, regardless of whether a user pause

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

On 1/17/11 11:41 AM, Jeroen Wijering wrote: This because browsers download the entire movie once playback starts, regardless of whether a user pauses the player. Interesting. Isn't that what Flash does as well? I know that I will often start playing a Flash movie, then pause it and go do so

Re: [whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

downloadBufferTarget in seconds is not that good. Think about a movie that takes more to load than to see. Depending on the settings the developer done, you might have to pause the video at some point to load the rest of the movie. On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:41:13 +0100, Jeroen Wijering wrote: He

[whatwg] Limiting the amount of downloaded but not watched video

Hello all, We are getting some questions from JW Player users that HTML5 video is quite wasteful on bandwidth for longer videos (think 10min+). This because browsers download the entire movie once playback starts, regardless of whether a user pauses the player. If throttling is used, it seems