Re: [whatwg] video background color (Was: Interpretation of video poster attribute)
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, Philip J�genstedt wrote: Safari already uses a transparent background by default and to me that doesn't seem like a bad idea -- it may be best to hide small 1px letterboxes due to rounding errors in aspect ratio calculation etc. Setting background-color:transparent to override the default black is probably less known to most authors and transparent background is also more in line with most other HTML elements. Fair enough. I would suggest eventually specifying this behavior in the rendering section, unless someone feels that default black letterboxes is very important. Yes, that's my plan. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] video background color (Was: Interpretation of video poster attribute)
Safari already uses a transparent background by default and to me that
doesn't seem like a bad idea -- it may be best to hide small 1px
letterboxes due to rounding errors in aspect ratio calculation etc.
Setting background-color:transparent to override the default black is
probably less known to most authors and transparent background is also
more in line with most other HTML elements.
I would suggest eventually specifying this behavior in the rendering
section, unless someone feels that default black letterboxes is very
important.
// Philip
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 21:02 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Philip Jgenstedt wrote:
The issue with the poster attribute is resolved, but one comment made me
remember something I've wondered about:
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 09:26 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
It's not impossible; first black would render 300x150, then the poster
The spec says: Areas of the element's playback area that do not contain
the video represent nothing.
What does this mean? Black is customary for video, but leaving the
region transparent (thus falling back to css background color) is
another option. Which is better?
It's transparent, but I intended to have the following rule in the style
sheet:
video { background: black; }
...so that it looks black unless the author restyles it. Does that make
sense?
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
--
Philip Jägenstedt
Opera Software
Re: [whatwg] video background color (Was: Interpretation of video poster attribute)
I agree.
dave
On Jun 19, 2008, at 8:05 AM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
Safari already uses a transparent background by default and to me that
doesn't seem like a bad idea -- it may be best to hide small 1px
letterboxes due to rounding errors in aspect ratio calculation etc.
Setting background-color:transparent to override the default black
is
probably less known to most authors and transparent background is also
more in line with most other HTML elements.
I would suggest eventually specifying this behavior in the rendering
section, unless someone feels that default black letterboxes is very
important.
// Philip
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 21:02 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Philip Jgenstedt wrote:
The issue with the poster attribute is resolved, but one comment
made me
remember something I've wondered about:
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 09:26 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
It's not impossible; first black would render 300x150, then the
poster
The spec says: Areas of the element's playback area that do not
contain
the video represent nothing.
What does this mean? Black is customary for video, but leaving the
region transparent (thus falling back to css background color) is
another option. Which is better?
It's transparent, but I intended to have the following rule in the
style
sheet:
video { background: black; }
...so that it looks black unless the author restyles it. Does that
make
sense?
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)
\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _
\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--
(,_..'`-.;.'
--
Philip Jägenstedt
Opera Software
[whatwg] video background color (Was: Interpretation of video poster attribute)
The issue with the poster attribute is resolved, but one comment made me remember something I've wondered about: On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 09:26 +, Ian Hickson wrote: It's not impossible; first black would render 300x150, then the poster The spec says: Areas of the element's playback area that do not contain the video represent nothing. What does this mean? Black is customary for video, but leaving the region transparent (thus falling back to css background color) is another option. Which is better? -- Philip Jägenstedt Opera Software
Re: [whatwg] video background color
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:42:28 +0200, Philip Jägenstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 09:26 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
It's not impossible; first black would render 300x150, then the poster
The spec says: Areas of the element's playback area that do not contain
the video represent nothing.
What does this mean? Black is customary for video, but leaving the
region transparent (thus falling back to css background color) is
another option. Which is better?
Maybe a default style sheet entry like
video { background-color:#000 }
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
http://www.opera.com/
Re: [whatwg] video background color (Was: Interpretation of video poster attribute)
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Philip J�genstedt wrote:
The issue with the poster attribute is resolved, but one comment made me
remember something I've wondered about:
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 09:26 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
It's not impossible; first black would render 300x150, then the poster
The spec says: Areas of the element's playback area that do not contain
the video represent nothing.
What does this mean? Black is customary for video, but leaving the
region transparent (thus falling back to css background color) is
another option. Which is better?
It's transparent, but I intended to have the following rule in the style
sheet:
video { background: black; }
...so that it looks black unless the author restyles it. Does that make
sense?
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
