Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:39 +0000, 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.
I'm having a hard time seeing how this is a use case for video and not
for img. If one wants the intrinsic width/height to be used, then simply
don't set width/height. Otherwise, just setting just one of width/height
or using CSS max-width/max-height should do the trick.
This is strange:
<video src="circle.mpg" width="400" height="400"> <!-- circle -->
<video src="circle.mpg" width="400" height="300"> <!-- pillarbox -->
This is effectively how YouTube behaves now with their recent change to
a widescreen player. It would look terrible if 4:3 videos were
stretched to fill the 16:9 viewport, instead of just using black bars on
the side. Even before when they were still using a 4:3 player,
widescreen videos were rendered as letterbox.
<img src="circle.jpg" width="400" height="400"> <!-- circle -->
<img src="circle.jpg" width="400" height="300"> <!-- oval -->
I think it would be much more consistent if these elements behaved in
the same way.
What is the use case for wanting a video to be stretched?
--
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
