| 00:28 | <Lachy_> | aargh! that HTML6 post got spammed already! :-( |
| 00:41 | <hsivonen> | the HTML6 post didn't make it to slashdot. did it make it to digg? |
| 00:42 | <othermaciej> | the webkit post didn't either, but it apparently actually fooled some people at least for a while |
| 10:03 | <annevk> | zcorpan_, I fixed the abort() tests here: http://tc.labs.opera.com/apis/XMLHttpRequest/abort/ |
| 10:03 | <annevk> | zcorpan_, I also fixed the specification to deal with when abort() should not trigger a state change to DONE |
| 10:04 | <zcorpan_> | annevk: ok |
| 10:08 | <annevk> | maybe RECEIVING should become LOADING |
| 10:08 | <annevk> | and SENT should prolly be SENDING |
| 10:29 | <annevk> | zcorpan_, regarding the proxy thing, I agree... |
| 10:30 | <annevk> | zcorpan_, I didn't draft that text... What I think it means is that some UAs let the user specify some proxy to use... |
| 10:35 | <zcorpan_> | ok |
| 10:36 | zcorpan_ | found an obscure opera bug regarding large negative 'left' plus some negative 'margin-left' on absolutely positioned elements appearing to the far _right_ |
| 10:37 | <annevk> | might just be that we round something... |
| 10:37 | <annevk> | to save storage |
| 10:38 | <zcorpan_> | http://simon.html5.org/test/opera/negative-absolute.htm |
| 10:41 | <hasather> | zcorpan_: I don't get a FAIL anywhere |
| 10:42 | <zcorpan_> | hasather: what build are you using? |
| 10:42 | <hasather> | latest weekly for Linux, build 628 |
| 10:42 | <zcorpan_> | ok |
| 10:43 | <zcorpan_> | i have 8767 windows |
| 10:43 | <hasather> | oops, sorry, completely missed the scrollbar |
| 10:43 | <zcorpan_> | ah |
| 10:55 | zcorpan_ | filed #258854 |
| 10:58 | <hasather> | zcorpan_: when was your job interview? |
| 10:58 | <hasather> | tomorrow? |
| 10:58 | <zcorpan_> | yes |
| 10:59 | <hasather> | ok |
| 10:59 | <hasather> | what kind of job is it? QA? |
| 10:59 | <zcorpan_> | i said that i was interested in working on a test suite for html5 |
| 10:59 | <zcorpan_> | we'll see what they say |
| 10:59 | <hasather> | aha |
| 11:04 | <krijnh> | 'Well one thing could be done would be to close the WHATWG list temporarily.' |
| 11:07 | <zcorpan_> | lol |
| 11:08 | <zcorpan_> | well one thing could be done would be for the htmlwg members to join the whatwg too |
| 11:15 | <krijnh> | Imho there should be just one list |
| 11:16 | <krijnh> | Just one spec, and just one editor |
| 11:17 | <krijnh> | Although, that one editor is subscribed to more than one list, so he could as well follow public-html as well :) |
| 11:17 | <krijnh> | as well as well, yeah, makes sense |
| 11:17 | <krijnh> | Think McFly! |
| 11:52 | <krijnh> | align="char" isn't in current drafts, is it going to be dropped or is something better coming up? |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | dropped in favor of text-align:<string> iirc |
| 11:53 | <Lachy> | krijnh, no browser ever supported it |
| 11:53 | <krijnh> | Lachy: I know |
| 11:53 | <krijnh> | annevk: Ah, k |
| 11:53 | <Lachy> | so if it's not even remotes supported, then there's no way it's getting included in HTML5 |
| 11:53 | <Lachy> | unless it's a new feature |
| 11:54 | <krijnh> | I didn't know about css3 text-align: <string> |
| 11:54 | <zcorpan_> | it was in css 2.0 too iirc |
| 11:54 | <zcorpan_> | dropped in 2.1 |
| 11:54 | <annevk> | yeah, what zcorpan_ said |
| 11:55 | <Lachy> | I wonder if it will ever be supported |
| 11:55 | <annevk> | well, if Dave Raggett is right and spreadsheets are the next thing... |
| 11:56 | <Lachy> | This has got to be close to the quote of the day: "Surely we're not trying to ensure that a Web page is presented the same in every browsing environment? What would be the use of that?" |
| 11:56 | <Lachy> | :-) |
| 11:56 | <annevk> | April Fools day is over Lachy |
| 11:56 | <krijnh> | Hehe |
| 11:58 | <annevk> | www-html is funny too |
| 11:58 | <annevk> | apparently XHTML 1.1 allows text/html as MIME type now |
| 11:58 | <annevk> | (the second edition that is) |
| 11:58 | <krijnh> | No April fool joke? |
| 11:58 | <Lachy> | ha! They published one: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4824 |
| 11:59 | <krijnh> | What a waste of time :/ |
| 11:59 | <Lachy> | I noticed that XHTML 1.1 post today :-) |
| 12:04 | <Dashiva> | So is the text/html xhtml a joke or not? |
| 12:04 | <zcorpan_> | pointer? |
| 12:04 | <annevk> | The XHTML2 WG is close to a joke |
| 12:05 | <annevk> | ... and they're the ones doing this |
| 12:05 | <Dashiva> | http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/conformance.html#uaconf |
| 12:05 | <zcorpan_> | oh, i thought there was a blog post or something |
| 12:06 | <Lachy> | there was a post to www-html |
| 12:06 | <Lachy> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2007Apr/0005.html |
| 12:06 | <Lachy> | there's a few responses as well |
| 12:08 | <annevk> | why doesn't the HTML WG get all the XHTML 1.x stuff btw? |
| 12:08 | <annevk> | so we can obsolete them all and say that they are irrelevant? |
| 12:08 | annevk | thinks that would make more sense |
| 12:08 | <Lachy> | raise the issue on public-html |
| 12:09 | <Lachy> | the XHTML2 WG should just get XHTML2. we should get all XHTML Basic, Print, 1.x, Mobile and everything else |
| 12:10 | <zcorpan_> | does it matter? |
| 12:11 | <annevk> | no, it would prolly mean more work for us |
| 12:11 | <annevk> | otoh, not having them might too |
| 12:11 | <annevk> | as silly people will start pointing out obvious incompatibilities |
| 12:12 | <annevk> | (I would, for instance, if I didn't know the story behind it.) |
| 12:12 | <zcorpan_> | we could just say that they are deliverables from the xhtml2 wg and can be ignored, or something |
| 12:12 | <annevk> | Anyone who feels that the RECEIVING constant should not be renamed to LOADING? |
| 12:12 | <annevk> | (for XMLHttpRequest) |
| 12:13 | <gsnedders> | is there any sort of feed for the SVN? |
| 12:14 | <annevk> | not until you contribute a patch to generate one |
| 12:14 | <gsnedders> | where is the SVN located anyway? |
| 12:14 | <zcorpan_> | for html5? |
| 12:14 | <gsnedders> | yes |
| 12:15 | <zcorpan_> | http://svn.whatwg.org/ |
| 12:15 | <annevk> | noted at the top of the draft... svn.whatwg.org/webapps/ |
| 12:15 | <gsnedders> | ah |
| 12:15 | <gsnedders> | I'd been trying to avoid downloading the entire draft again, looking around on the site |
| 12:16 | <zcorpan_> | annevk: i don't feel strongly about it, but currently HTMLMediaElement has LOADING |
| 12:16 | <gsnedders> | any real preference as to what language it is written in? |
| 12:16 | <zcorpan_> | gsnedders: there is a tracker written in python |
| 12:17 | <zcorpan_> | adding a feed to that should be trivial |
| 12:17 | <annevk> | the code for that tracker is online |
| 12:17 | <MikeSmith> | annevk, gsnedders - with some minimal config, you could set up a feed for the project SVN though CIA |
| 12:17 | <MikeSmith> | http://cia.vc/ |
| 12:17 | <MikeSmith> | WebKit is using that |
| 12:17 | <annevk> | http://code.google.com/p/html5/ has it somewhere |
| 12:18 | <MikeSmith> | I mean the WebKit project |
| 12:18 | <annevk> | oh, maybe we could let Hixie install that then... |
| 12:18 | gsnedders | has never actually written anything much in Python, though used code as reference many times |
| 12:18 | <annevk> | on tracker.whatwg.org or something |
| 12:19 | <zcorpan_> | or svn.whatwg.org |
| 12:19 | <gsnedders> | where is the code for the tracker? I can't see a link anyway… maybe I'm just not doing well today :) |
| 12:20 | <annevk> | http://html5.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/web-apps-tracker/ |
| 12:21 | <annevk> | zcorpan_, yeah, I noticed, LOADING it is |
| 14:43 | <Lachy> | The XHTML2 WG finally got something right! http://www.w3.org/mid/4611023C.3020607⊙ac :-) |
| 14:44 | <Lachy> | well, almost |
| 14:46 | <zcorpan> | oh. i really thought they wanted to allow text/html |
| 14:46 | <Lachy> | the only problem is that there is still no MUST level requirement |
| 14:47 | <Lachy> | it should say something like "... MUST use an XML MIME type, and SHOULD use app/xhtml+xml" |
| 14:47 | zcorpan | doesn't care about the 1.1 spec anyway |
| 14:47 | <Lachy> | yeah, but we should encourage them to get something right |
| 14:48 | <zcorpan> | go ahead :) |
| 14:48 | krijnh | has to care about the 1.1 spec |
| 14:48 | <krijnh> | I get clients requesting 'XHTML 1.1' valid markup from time to time |
| 14:49 | <krijnh> | No you don't you silly client, you really want to support IE |
| 14:49 | <Lachy> | krijnh, the correct response to that is "No." The markup will be conforming, but it will not be XHTML 1.1 due to compatibiley reasons" |
| 14:50 | <krijnh> | Yeah, but they are going to change the spec now, I can't say that anymore ;) |
| 14:50 | <krijnh> | but if |
| 14:50 | <Lachy> | "... I am using conforming HTML 4.01 (or 5), which will yeild identical results" |
| 14:50 | <Lachy> | s/identical/better/ |
| 14:50 | <zcorpan> | yeah, sell them html5 instead |
| 14:50 | <krijnh> | That's what my CMS uses, yes |
| 14:50 | <krijnh> | I am :) |
| 14:51 | <Lachy> | they might object to HTML5's maturity level |
| 14:51 | <krijnh> | HTML5 is more mature than XHTML 1.x imho |
| 14:51 | zcorpan | usually points out that html5 is more in line with what browsers do, and it's possible to use a subset of it |
| 14:52 | <krijnh> | Off topic; typo3 sucks |
| 14:52 | <krijnh> | Tee hee |
| 14:52 | <zcorpan> | not that i do a lot of freelance work, but anyway |
| 14:52 | <krijnh> | zcorpan: what do you do for work then? |
| 14:52 | <zcorpan> | i study |
| 14:53 | <krijnh> | Ah |
| 14:53 | <krijnh> | Me too :) |
| 14:59 | <zcorpan> | the html60 guy found public-html |
| 15:02 | <Lachy> | I encountered several parse errors while reading his e-mail |
| 15:04 | <Lachy> | a file preview feature might be a good feature for browsers to consider implementing, but it certainly doesn't need a new element |
| 15:05 | <zcorpan> | i don't understand any of his proposals, frankly |
| 15:06 | <Lachy> | all he wants is a way for a browser to show a preview of a picture being uploaded |
| 15:06 | <Lachy> | everything else he wrote about octogos and new input controls is irrelevent |
| 15:07 | <Lachy> | *octogons |
| 15:07 | <zcorpan> | he has a lot of other proposals too on his site |
| 15:09 | <Dashiva> | Isn't it a bit early to start on html 60 while we're still doing 5? |
| 15:09 | zcorpan | will work on html 7000 |
| 15:12 | <Lachy> | Dashiva, it's good to start working on future versions in parallel with the current version :-) |
| 15:20 | <Lachy> | aargh! he sent that post 3 times :-( |
| 15:37 | <hsivonen> | I wonder why the HTML 6.0 guy/gal doesn't sign the proposals with a real name |
| 15:38 | <Lachy> | if I wrote proposals like that, I'd want to be anonymous too! |
| 15:38 | <krijnh> | Hehe |
| 15:38 | Dashiva | doesn't see any proposals |
| 15:38 | <krijnh> | Perhaps for a native Russian this is very good :) |
| 15:45 | <Lachy> | new Polish translation of the FAQ http://blog.whatwg.org/faq/pl/ |
| 16:06 | <annevk> | seems like the W3C is not going to fix <?xml-stylesheet?>: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Apr/0001.html |
| 16:06 | <annevk> | silly |
| 16:06 | <annevk> | otoh, it was already on my XML5 todo list |
| 16:07 | <krijnh> | XML5? |
| 16:07 | <annevk> | that or XML2 |
| 16:07 | <Lachy> | krijnh, we're building Web 5.0! |
| 16:07 | <hsivonen> | what's the deal with RELAX NG fragments in the spec? surely it isn't Hixie's idea? |
| 16:07 | <annevk> | dunno, no |
| 16:07 | <Lachy> | what RelaxNG fragments? |
| 16:08 | <krijnh> | Lachy: you have a logo already? ;) |
| 16:08 | <hsivonen> | Lachy: not in the spec now but said in email as if there would be |
| 16:08 | Lachy | looks... |
| 16:08 | <krijnh> | "Since having informal Relax-NG schema fragments in the HTML specification has been discussed, I think there might be room to discuss the inclusion of default CSS (perhaps even Aural CSS) fragments in the specification as well." |
| 16:09 | <Lachy> | found the email |
| 16:09 | annevk | suspects that people who archive e-mail put that in "xml-pipedream" |
| 16:09 | <krijnh> | hsivonen: perhaps people misread your mails about your thesis |
| 16:10 | <hsivonen> | krijnh: that would be a rather radical misreading, but radical misreadings happen |
| 16:10 | <annevk> | btw, is anyone going to post the 2 april post? |
| 16:10 | <annevk> | or was there no such thing? |
| 16:11 | <Lachy> | oh crap, I was going to write something about <video> |
| 16:11 | <hsivonen> | Lachy: did you have a <video> post coming up? |
| 16:11 | <hsivonen> | right |
| 16:11 | <Lachy> | oh well, it's too late now |
| 16:11 | <Lachy> | it's getting late and I don't have time now |
| 16:11 | <annevk> | it's still April 2 |
| 16:11 | <Lachy> | anyone, feel free to write it if you want |
| 16:11 | <krijnh> | Not in Australia |
| 16:11 | <zcorpan> | what were you going to write? |
| 16:11 | <Lachy> | yeah, get with the times! It's April 3 already |
| 16:12 | <annevk> | it's e-April 2 damn it |
| 16:12 | <Lachy> | I was just going to do an overview of the new video element |
| 16:12 | <annevk> | oh ok |
| 16:12 | <Lachy> | yeah, it is in UTC, so I'll accept that |
| 16:12 | <gavin_> | what's special about April 2? |
| 16:12 | <gavin_> | International Children's Book Day? |
| 16:12 | <annevk> | day after April 1 |
| 16:13 | <annevk> | I thought the idea was to make another joke this day to confuse people |
| 16:13 | <Lachy> | no, Hixie wanted another post to go up after the april 1 post just so people didn't get confused aboutit any longer |
| 16:13 | <annevk> | oh, he wanted the opposite |
| 16:13 | <annevk> | that's not fun |
| 16:13 | <Lachy> | yeah, but it'd be funny to confuse people more |
| 16:13 | <Lachy> | post about HTML 60! |
| 16:14 | <zcorpan> | let's ask the russian guy to blog |
| 16:14 | <gavin_> | was there an April 1 gag on the WHATWG list that I missed? |
| 16:14 | <Lachy> | on the blog |
| 16:14 | <gavin_> | oh |
| 16:14 | <krijnh> | And it was hilarious. |
| 16:15 | <gavin_> | I don't read the blog |
| 16:15 | <gavin_> | maybe I should |
| 16:15 | <Lachy> | http://blog.whatwg.org/html6-plan |
| 16:16 | <annevk> | "To avoid any confusion about the estimated time of arrival HTML6 has been renamed to HTML60. The idea is that when all twenty year somethings currently working on the specification turn sixty something it will be done." |
| 16:17 | <annevk> | s/year// |
| 16:17 | <hsivonen> | a sociologist could have a field day comparing the dynamics of the WHATWG, AtomPub and HTML WG mailing lists |
| 16:19 | <Lachy> | I'm hoping public-html will become more like whatwg once we actually have both Chairs and everyone agrees to work on HTML5, keeping the specs in sync |
| 16:20 | <hsivonen> | yeah |
| 16:20 | <zcorpan> | and the people who can't manage the large amount of emails have left ;) |
| 16:20 | <zcorpan> | or at least don't say so much |
| 16:20 | <Lachy> | at the moment, public-html just seems to be suffering from a few growing pains. To many newbies all joined at once, without any clear direction given |
| 16:20 | <annevk> | woha, 2 days 60 e-mails |
| 16:21 | <zcorpan> | Lachy: indeed |
| 16:21 | <annevk> | that's 1800 e-mails for one month |
| 16:21 | <annevk> | and most of the crap was posted in the weekend! |
| 16:22 | annevk | is already at 25 messages to public-html since the start... |
| 16:22 | <Lachy> | If this rate keeps up, we'll get another 800 e-mails on public-html this month |
| 16:23 | <annevk> | of course, nothing compared to a certain Mike Schinkel |
| 16:23 | <Lachy> | or, actually, I'd expect more because weekends tend to be the quieter times |
| 16:23 | <annevk> | I just said, 1800 |
| 16:24 | <Lachy> | Mike has a total of 56 |
| 16:24 | <krijnh> | Lachy: didn't you send him a mail? |
| 16:24 | <Lachy> | how did you calculate 1800? |
| 16:25 | <Lachy> | krijnh, yes, but that wasn't conted |
| 16:25 | <Lachy> | counted |
| 16:25 | <krijnh> | But what did you tell him? |
| 16:25 | <annevk> | nm |
| 16:25 | <annevk> | I should have said 900... |
| 16:26 | annevk | did 30*60 instead of 30*30 or 15*60... |
| 16:27 | <Lachy> | krijnh, I wrote a polite e-mail informing him to stop flooding the list |
| 16:27 | <Lachy> | I can forward you a copy if you like |
| 16:28 | <Lachy> | he responed, and I'm drafting my response to that too |
| 16:29 | <krijnh> | Perhaps he didn't get it |
| 16:29 | <Lachy> | oh, he didn't. That was obvious from his reply |
| 16:29 | annevk | changes topic to 'WHATTF (HTML60) -- http://www.whattf.org/ -- Logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ -- Please leave your sense of logic at the door, thanks!' |
| 16:31 | <Lachy> | I also wrote to him about the issue numbers in the wiki, to which he responded "The numbers are the "killer feature"" :-) |
| 16:31 | <Lachy> | Hopefully the thread on public-html will convince him otherwise |
| 16:32 | <krijnh> | The killer feature |
| 16:32 | <krijnh> | Okay :) |
| 16:42 | annevk | missed http://mail.google.com/mail/help/paper/ |
| 16:46 | <zcorpan> | lol |
| 17:17 | <Philip`> | Hmm, my <canvas> tests have found a bug in a pre-XPSP2 Win32 string processing function, which was somewhat unexpected and irritating since it's wasted half a day - but tests are meant to find bugs, so I suppose I shouldn't complain... |
| 17:20 | <zcorpan> | Philip`: perhaps you should document it somewhere so others don't waste half a day too |
| 17:22 | <Philip`> | I'll complain to Microsoft that their documentation is wrong (since it looks like they updated it to account for the bug, but incorrectly), and get Mozilla's code fixed to work around it, and then I'll be happy :-) |
| 17:23 | <zcorpan> | ok |
| 17:23 | <zcorpan> | something opera would have to work around too? |
| 17:27 | <Philip`> | Only if they use Uniscribe's ScriptItemize function (and expect it to stay within the buffer length it's given) - as far as I can tell from Opera.dll, they don't use that function, so it shouldn't be a problem |
| 18:14 | <zcorpan> | i didn't read the <q> mail, but whatever it says it suggests to me it's time to drop it :) |
| 18:16 | <annevk> | <q src=uri cite=string> is the suggestion |
| 18:16 | <annevk> | which is a) not backwards compatible, b) silly and c) too late to count as a April 1 joke |
| 18:32 | KevinMarks | is listening to the yahoo pipes talk at google |
| 18:33 | <KevinMarks> | just asked for a way to say that a layer doesn't get events |
| 18:39 | <othermaciej> | does "layer" mean something special in the context of pipes, or do you mean a CSS layer? |
| 18:39 | <KevinMarks> | they meant a css layer (though they are using canvas too) |
| 18:40 | <annevk> | opacity:0 in case of IE |
| 18:40 | <annevk> | well, something equivalent to that |
| 19:09 | <othermaciej> | KevinMarks: there's no standard way (and no way at all in most browsers) to make something that is visible but can be clicked through |
| 19:13 | <Hixie> | if people want to write a funny but not wrong post for april 2nd, i'm sure they can find plenty of material in amongst the tag, xhtml2, xforms, svg, and other wgs and drafts... |
| 19:19 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: would Thursday work for you for lunch? |
| 19:19 | <Hixie> | i was about to say "sure!", but let me check my calendar first! |
| 19:20 | <Hixie> | i have a meeting up til 11:30 |
| 19:20 | <Hixie> | but after that i'm free |
| 19:21 | <othermaciej> | all right, let's do 11:30 |
| 19:21 | <Hixie> | cool |
| 19:21 | <Hixie> | you guys coming to the 'plex? |
| 19:22 | <othermaciej> | yes |
| 19:22 | <othermaciej> | (hopefully carpooling so we can park) |
| 19:23 | <Hixie> | cool |
| 20:34 | <hsivonen> | WordPress could you a UI for marking multiple comments as spam in one go |
| 20:35 | <hsivonen> | Lachy: btw, are you keeping an eye on spam on the whatwg blog? |
| 20:35 | <hsivonen> | I just got rid of a bunch of SEO spam |
| 21:48 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: btw, did you have a chance to mull over the api proposal? |
| 21:48 | <Hixie> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#media |
| 22:01 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: CAN_SHOW_STATIC_VIEW_OF_CURRENT_TIME seems like an overly long name, although it is very precise |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | it was your proposal :-P |
| 22:01 | <othermaciej> | LOADED_FRAME might be better named LOADED_INITIAL_FRAME or something |
| 22:01 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: it was not intended seriously |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | oh ok |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | i don't really have a better name |
| 22:02 | <othermaciej> | CAN_SHOW_CURRENT_FRAME |
| 22:03 | <Hixie> | i suppose that's clear enough even in the audio case, yeah |
| 22:03 | <Hixie> | regenning the spec... |
| 22:04 | <othermaciej> | the fact that EMPTY is used twice is a little awkward, not sure what to call the second EMPTY instead |
| 22:05 | <othermaciej> | CANT_PLAY is a little inaccurate |
| 22:05 | <Hixie> | UNAVAILABLE ? |
| 22:09 | <othermaciej> | sounds good |
| 22:09 | <Hixie> | ok |
| 22:42 | <hsivonen> | looks like (legal issues aside) in terms of spec writing terms Theora complies with WHATWG philosophy but H.264 does not |
| 22:43 | <hsivonen> | s/writing terms/writing,/ |
| 22:43 | <Hixie> | the whatwg philosophy is pragmatism |
| 22:43 | <Hixie> | if one of the major browser vendors doesn't want to do ogg, ogg isn't an option. same with h.264. |
| 22:44 | <Hixie> | this leaves us in an interesting conundrum out of which i see no solution. |
| 22:44 | <Hixie> | (the arguments in favour of h.264 are compelling, as much as those in favour of ogg.) |
| 22:45 | <Dashiva> | What about system codecs, have those been taken into the equation? |
| 22:45 | <hsivonen> | the big practical problem with H.264 is that saying "H.264" is pointless. Saying "the H.264 subset that QuickTime supports" is more realistic, but producing that stuff with non-Apple encoders is *hard* |
| 22:46 | <hsivonen> | Dashiva: doesn't that degenerate to the issue of different installations having different plug-ins |
| 22:46 | <hsivonen> | ? |
| 22:46 | <hsivonen> | they'd just be different plug-ins |
| 22:47 | <hsivonen> | I have advocated H.264 on standards grounds elsewhere. |
| 22:47 | <Dashiva> | Not as much, since the API would be the same in all cases |
| 22:48 | <hsivonen> | but when people ask me, what x264 flags to use, I don't know what to tell them |
| 22:48 | <hsivonen> | Dashiva: same as in QuickTime, gstreamer and whatever the Windows Media API is called |
| 22:49 | <Dashiva> | I'm not sure what you mean |
| 22:50 | <hsivonen> | Dashiva: every platform has a different codec extensibility API |
| 22:51 | <Dashiva> | So the browsers need to program to one API per OS, but they still present a single media API in the browser. |
| 22:51 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: the proposal is H.264 Baseline Profile, which is supposedly patent-safe (though MPEG-LA claim otherwise) |
| 22:51 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: that's what people mean when they say H.264 should be the minimum required. |
| 22:54 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: good luck with authors figuring out how to clamp an encoder to that profile |
| 22:55 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: Baseline JPEG works because authors don't have non-baseline software available to them |
| 22:55 | <Hixie> | i'm not the one to convince. |
| 22:55 | <Hixie> | (note how the spec already says Ogg Theora) |