On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 3:00 AM, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonas Sicking wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
What I did notice in our code though is how we deal with the case when
there are multiple maps with the same name. In this case we
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Chris Double
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Peter Kasting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think it is the end of the world if this attribute goes in, but I
see very little benefit to it, and I am always for removing items with
From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Geoffrey Sneddon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED]; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2008 9:56 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Question regarding accessibility for img
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
On 30 Nov 2008, at
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Try the following markup in firefox:
map name=foo/map
map name=foo
area shape=circle coords=10,10,10 href=http://www.mozilla.com;
/map
img src=http://www.mozilla.org/images/feature-logos1.png;
usemap=#foo width=20 height=20
This
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Another thing, if I as a website developer find a video that was encoded
with the wrong pixel ratio, wouldn't the simplest, and most intuitive,
way to fix it be to simply set a width and height on video until it
looked approximately correct? Yes,
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:37 AM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Another thing, if I as a website developer find a video that was encoded
with the wrong pixel ratio, wouldn't the simplest, and most intuitive,
way to fix it be to simply set a width
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Try the following markup in firefox:
map name=foo/map
map name=foo
area shape=circle coords=10,10,10 href=http://www.mozilla.com;
/map
img src=http://www.mozilla.org/images/feature-logos1.png;
usemap=#foo width=20 height=20
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Matthew Gregan wrote:
I'm seeking clarification on when the videoWidth and videoHeight
attributes are expected to become valid. Actually it'd probably be
useful to have all of the metadata attributes listed explicitly
somewhere so that it's clear exactly what is
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Philip J�genstedt wrote:
Now that the pixelratio override is gone, shouldn't the influence of
pixel aspect ratio on the layout be removed also?
It is, isn't it? What did I leave in?
I would prefer if the default were to stretch to fit if both
width/height are given,
Ian Hickson schrieb:
You can jump to a position that's a fraction of the whole clip by setting
'currentTime' to a fractional multiple of 'duration'.
Right, I was thinking of what happens if no duration could be determined
with acceptable effort. However, by now I happen to think that
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:39 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
We definitely don't want to stretch the video. One of the important use
cases if having a video playback area and then playing videos with
different aspect ratios in that playback area. It should all just work.
why should this be different
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:39 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Philip Jgenstedt wrote:
Now that the pixelratio override is gone, shouldn't the influence of
pixel aspect ratio on the layout be removed also?
It is, isn't it? What did I leave in?
Video content should be
Tab Atkins Jr. ha scritto:
[[off list]]
Well, in fact, the above could be done as well by 'playing' with anchors
(but is it still possible to set an anchor somewhere in the document, such
as a id=foo /? I haven't found examples for that, perhaps I'm missing
something...).
Yes, a hash
Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:39 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
We definitely don't want to stretch the video. One of the important use
cases if having a video playback area and then playing videos with
different aspect ratios in that playback area. It should all just work.
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 18:19 +0100, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:39 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
We definitely don't want to stretch the video. One of the important use
cases if having a video playback area and then playing videos with
different
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why should this be different for images and video?
Why should it be the same, other than consistency? I wouldn't make img
stretch either if I was defining it today. Allowing stretching of images
enabled a lot of problems, such as images at the wrong
Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
The use case for stretching moving images (video) is exactly the
same as for stretching animations (img src=animation.gif) or static
images (img src=static.jpg).
Consistency is not a use case. For images, we're constrained by
backwards compatibility requirements to
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Calogero Alex Baldacchino wrote:
Yes, a hash link (a href=#foo) will scroll to the element with an
id=foo. If coding properly, you'll virtually *never* use an a for
an actual *anchor*, but rather will target the most semantically
appropriate element, such as a
BTW, using CSS transforms (not a standard yet, but implemented in Webkit and
Gecko now), you can stretch video (or anything else) any way you want.
Rob
--
He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:19 AM, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:39 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
video src=circle.mpg width=400 height=400 !-- circle --
video src=circle.mpg width=400 height=300 !-- pillarbox --
This is effectively how
Am Dienstag, den 02.12.2008, 11:02 +1100 schrieb Silvia Pfeiffer:
I would support an explicit keepaspectratio attribute, which turns the
width/height from a video width/height to a viewport.
In fact, such an attribute would be awesome for images, too.
It could be a CSS attribute or an explicit
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 23:07 +0100, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Given the number of people who watch 4:3 video stretched to a 16:9
display without even noticing/caring that the aspect ratio is wrong,
While I'm aware that there are such people, largely because they don't
know how to configure
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:19 AM, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:39 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
video src=circle.mpg width=400 height=400 !-- circle --
video
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
Not all video players behave like the YouTube one though. Many stretch
with the width/height attributes.
Yeah, it's really annoying. :-)
I would support an explicit keepaspectratio attribute, which turns the
width/height from a video
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the few servers that don't support seeking, duration is not
available.
Note that that is non-conforming at the moment. You have to have a
duration available (though it can be +Infinity if you think that the
resource is
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:37 AM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Try the following markup in firefox:
map name=foo/map
map name=foo
area shape=circle
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Jonas: are there pages that depend on this? If we could remove that
quirk, that'd be awesome...
I don't know more than what's in that bug [1], but if IE8 indeed has
dropped this quirk then I'm more than happy to do the same in firefox.
Ok. I'm
At 2:06 + 2/12/08, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Chris Double wrote:
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the few servers that don't support seeking, duration is not
available.
Note that that is non-conforming at the moment. You have
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We removed some other features (e.g. bufferedBytes and totalBytes) because
implementors said they would always provide accurate values in the
buffered and duration attributes. If we allow duration to be NaN, then
we'd have to
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Chris Double wrote:
It's not possible to always provide accurate values for duration - we've
already discussed that and you suggested estimating. I don't see that as
an accurate value.
The spec does allow for estimations and provides for the estimate being
revised
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:42:17 -0400, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
What about the method=POST case where the query string is kept?
form action=mailto:?subject=1+2; method=POST
31 matches
Mail list logo
