On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Philip J�genstedt wrote:
video poster=image_of_unknown_dimension
src=video_of_unknown_but_same_dimension/video
This is a probable and reasonable scenario, but currently it's
impossible to use a poster image without knowing its dimensions.
It's not impossible; first
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 07:15 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
So, to summarise, an img represents its src=, and a video represents
its poster=. So use the same mechanism (stretching the image to fit the
box dimensions) for both.
Fair enough.
This isn't currently defined (even without a poster, as
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Philip J�genstedt wrote:
This isn't currently defined (even without a poster, as far as I can
tell), but my intention would be to not make the poster affect the
intrinsic dimensions, and for the default, in the absence of video
data, is 300x150.
This is defined
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 09:56 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
The problem with scaling to the poster's size is that it would make
the veo resize twice e (300x150 - poster - video) instead of just
once (300x150 blank, then poster - video).
If poster is to video what src is to img, then
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:22:40 +0200, Chris Double
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:36 PM, Philip Jägenstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
This is just to provide sane defaults for authors who trust the browser
to do the right things in absence of width/height. Safari already
Hi again,
Reading
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Oct/0108.html it is
clear that the intention of the poster attribute is to represent a still
image from the video. This should probably be made explicit in the spec
with something in the style of:
The poster image typically
Hi!
I'm a bit puzzled about how to interpret the poster attribute on
HTMLVideoElement:
The poster attribute gives the address of an image file that the user
agent can show while no video data is available. The attribute, if
present, must contain a URI (or IRI).
Is the intention that this image
