On Oct 15, 2008, at 1:44 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
While the underlying media frameworks can't necessarily answer,
if I
give you a file with this MIME type, can you
On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 23:43:55 +0200, Simon Pieters [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Color attributes in HTML have special processing.
It seems that some pages use three-digit notation and expect it to work as
in CSS. I've made the algorithm do that and I've drafted up a spec for
this:
...not sure if the following has been noted; if so, apologies...
Currently, animated GIF and MNG images are used, sometimes, in loop forever
form. Assuming that video might be used in an
analogous fashion, loop-forever should be supported.
I shudder to think about looping audio, however.
I shudder to think about looping audio, however. Animated GIFs are often
called dancing baloney ... and looping audio would be...?
One can program a game with svg or canvas with background music and
sound effects, which is something proprietary plugins already allow.
Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 20:03 -0700 schrieb Eric Carlson:
After thinking about this, I'm not sure that limiting playback to a
section of a media file will be used very often.
Transcript anyone ? If you want to embed a lecture, for example, it
makes sense to be able to link to specific
On Oct 15, 2008, at 8:31 PM, Chris Double wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Eric Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However I also think
that playing just a segment of a media file will be a common use-
case, so I
don't think we need start and end either.
How would you emulate end
On Oct 16, 2008, at 7:32 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 20:03 -0700 schrieb Eric Carlson:
After thinking about this, I'm not sure that limiting playback to a
section of a media file will be used very often.
Transcript anyone ? If you want to embed a lecture,
hey people, you like to make everything as complex as posible don't you?
playcount=1 only one time
playcount=0 loop forever
or
playcount=-1 loop forever
whats the problem? is it really so hard to program that?
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:17:49 +0200, SA Alfonso Baqueiro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hey people, you like to make everything as complex as posible don't you?
Yes.
playcount=1 only one time
playcount=0 loop forever
or
playcount=-1 loop forever
whats the problem? is it really so hard to
On Oct 16, 2008, at 8:17 AM, SA Alfonso Baqueiro wrote:
playcount=1 only one time
playcount=0 loop forever
or
playcount=-1 loop forever
Or how about loop = loop forever, else play one time though?
eric
On 10/16/08, Robert O'Callahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Michael A. Puls II
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Maybe video needs something (currently. maybe not in a few years)
like a wmode param where the author can suggest (and the user can
ultimately override if
Eric Carlson wrote:
On Oct 15, 2008, at 8:31 PM, Chris Double wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Eric Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
However I also think
that playing just a segment of a media file will be a common
use-case, so I
don't think we need start and end either.
How
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Bonner, Matt wrote:
the original proposal said:
var playing = !video.paused
!video.ended video.readyState = HTMLMediaElement.CAN_PLAY
you appear to be proposing:
var playing = !video.paused video.readyState =
HTMLMediaElement.CAN_PLAY
Allowing client-side fragments reduces the number of connections but
allowing server-side partial content is likely to reduce the volume of data.
Those features are antagonists, both are needed and it is hard to tell when
each one should be.
The case of hyperlinked transcript would be better
On Oct 16, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Dr. Markus Walther wrote:
Eric Carlson wrote:
I agree that it is more work to implement a custom controller, but
it
seems a reasonable requirement given that this is likely to be a
relatively infrequent usage pattern.
How do you know this will be infrequent?
Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On 10/14/08, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be honest I'm not really convinced we need the looping feature at all.
It seems like we should drop this from the current version. What benefit
does it bring? Is looping really that common? If we got rid of it we
Eric Carlson wrote:
As we discussed on IRC today, I think a valid use case for looping is
background audio. It is possible to implement looping from script, but
as someone else in this thread commented, it will be very difficult to
do cleanly (eg. without artifacts).
If this was done as
Chris Double wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Eric Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However I also think
that playing just a segment of a media file will be a common use-case, so I
don't think we need start and end either.
How would you emulate end via JavaScript in a reasonably
Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
Why is FORM INPUT[type=hidden] not enough?
Hi Chris, I'm sorry I don't follow your comment. My suggestion
is about input type=hidden currently not being allowed in
all locations in a document. Could you elaborate?
(Maybe the followups below will make things clearer
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Michael A. Puls II [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
That would be cool to do it automatically. But, does using an overlay
guarantee that other elements can't be placed on top of it? If so,
then only the author of the page would know (by testing) that nothing
needs to
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 5:24 AM, Dr. Markus Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Imagine e.g. an audio editor in a browser and the task play this
selection of the oscillogram...
Why should such use cases be left to the Flash 10 crowd
Your question made me think you want HEAD INPUT[type=hidden].
INPUT[type=hidden] must be within a paragraph (explicitly or implicitly)
for consistency with other INPUT controls that are displayed. So, where a
paragraph is not allowed, neither is the INPUT control; inserted where it
does not
The documentation page Lachlan visited describes embedded technology,
truncated to fit; you should understand that it may be incomplete. The
mainstream documentation for the BGSOUND element is at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms534134(VS.85).aspx.
HTH,
Chris
-Original Message-
table
tr
input type=hidden ...
td/td
/tr
/table
This is something I wanted to do recently. I was building HTML in a
Perl script, adding table rows in a loop, and I wanted some rows to
contain text field with user-editable value, while for other rows I
wanted the value to be
While the first item's length in segments is greater than 2 and the
first character in each item in segments is a U+0030 DIGIT ZERO
character, remove the first character from each item in segments.
Does this mean, if the length of the first item in segments is
greater than 2 then loop
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 23:08:32 +0200, Mike Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, maybe it is? Reading the spec again, I realize I had
missed the sentence All phrasing content is also flow
content. (I was mainly on the lookout for DTD-like info.)
I have included a couple of the cases I'm thinking
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Andy Lyttle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
table
tr
input type=hidden ...
td/td
/tr
/table
This is something I wanted to do recently. I was building HTML in a Perl
script, adding table rows in a loop, and I wanted some rows to contain text
field with
That seems sort of weird though. You're fine with putting the
input type=text within the td, but you'd prefer *not* to do
the same with the input type=hidden? It seems much more
reasonable to just put it in the exact same place. At any rate, it
certainly doesn't seem like a compelling
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 1:32 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 20:03 -0700 schrieb Eric Carlson:
After thinking about this, I'm not sure that limiting playback to a
section of a media file will be used very often.
Transcript anyone ? If you want
On 10/16/08, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On 10/14/08, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be honest I'm not really convinced we need the looping feature at all.
It seems like we should drop this from the current version. What benefit
does it bring? Is
Hello,
I've received a number of responses, and it looks like Thursday, 10/28, is
the best date. I think that 7pm is the best time, but if someone has any
pressing arguments for an earlier time (like, most whatwg contributors don't
have have real jobs anyway =) then feel free to send them my way.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Eduard Pascual [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I quite agree with this idea. For a number, I think -1 would be ideal:
it is already used by lots of desktop software to convey similar
meanings, and could have an interesting benefit implementation-wise:
if the 2's
Can AUDIO/VIDEO tag have a balance attribute like?
http://developer.mozilla.org/En/HTML/Element/Bgsound
BTW: Thanks to
http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-October/016699.html
for dmo link.
spec: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#dom-media-volume
33 matches
Mail list logo
