Hardly an expert in this field, but wouldn't implementing media tags
(video and audio) a tad like websockets be a good idea. Using the tag
should add a special header that says it can upgrade conneciton to
something like media which constantly lets client have duplex
conversation with the server,
This is a bulk reply to the feedback that resulted from the following blog
post from YouTube's API team:
http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
So, for a quick recap, their problems are:
1. Standard video format
2.
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 4:54 PM, John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
MySpace is my canonical example - they allow arbitrary SWFs to be embedded
in profiles, but not iframes. Flash added support a while back that
allows containing pages to block SWFs from executing script or accessing the
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 23:19:42 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+...@gmail.comsimetrical%2b...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
The benefit to the
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 17:42:22 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Philip Jägenstedt
phil...@opera.comwrote:
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 16:24:45 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
Some UAs request video without sending Range:
: [whatwg] More YouTube response
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:13:00 +0200, Shane Fagan shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com
wrote:
Well this isnt really a list where we should talk about the dos and
donts of web content distribution. DRM content can be embedded in the
video tag and decoded using installable
Yes, the browser disconnects, and scripts have no influence over it. With
preload=metadata implemented, it should disconnect as soon as possible
after getting enough data for the first frame. For preload=auto, it will
disconnect after buffering X seconds of data. If you need more granularity
MySpace is my canonical example - they allow arbitrary SWFs to be embedded
in profiles, but not iframes. Flash added support a while back that
allows containing pages to block SWFs from executing script or accessing the
contents of the page, which MySpace enforces by rewriting the embed tag
that
Ok - sounds like pretty much unanimous objection to the idea of DRM plugins
being instantiated via video tag. I'll still be pushing on the DRM plugin
providers to implement an interface that mimics the video tag - my primary
goal is to be able to have a single player implementation independent of
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On Jul 5, 2010, at 13:10, Marques Johansson wrote:
For the content that is not protected the download or stream is metered
so the client can be charged only for the time they spent watching the
content. We error on the
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius svartma...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Marques Johansson marq...@displague.com wrote:
The company I work for, VOD.com (sfw) (aka Hotmovies .com and clips .com
-
nsfw (spaces added)), offer video on demand services to thousands of
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 15:19:35 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On Jul 5, 2010, at 13:10, Marques Johansson wrote:
For the content that is not protected the download or stream is
metered
so the
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+...@gmail.comsimetrical%2b...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Marques Johansson marq...@displague.com
wrote:
For my purposes I am interested in application-controlled video delivery.
I
want to be able to deliver
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Philip Jägenstedt phil...@opera.comwrote:
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 15:19:35 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
Is preload=none not enough? I can't imagine the actual bandwidth savings
of more fine-grained control to be significant, probably any
On 6 Jul 2010, at 15:24, Marques Johansson wrote:
A 200 response or partial 206 responses that returns less than the full
requested range is not handled by browsers in a consistent or usable way (for
this purpose). Only Chrome will continue to fetch where the previous short
206 response
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 16:33:47 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Philip Jägenstedt
phil...@opera.comwrote:
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 15:19:35 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
Is preload=none not enough? I can't imagine
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 16:24:45 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+...@gmail.comsimetrical%2b...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com
wrote:
For my purposes I am
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Philip Jägenstedt phil...@opera.comwrote:
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 16:24:45 +0200, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
Some UAs request video without sending Range: bytes 0-. The server has
no
way to negotiate that the UA (a) must use ranges to
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
The benefit to the user is that they could have less open network
connections while streaming video from server controlled sites and those
sites will have the ability to meter their usage more accurately.
Inserting
On Jul 6, 2010, at 06:19, Marques Johansson wrote:
That being said, I don't think the business models of one of the largest
online video markets should put be on trial through a by a standards list.
Well, if you are suggesting that your use case needs to be addressed by
introducing
2010-07-05 01:56 EEST: David Gerard:
On 4 July 2010 13:57, bjartursvartma...@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see how BBC would be harmed by the usage of alternative
software. Its business model is about content, not software, right?
See, you're using logic and sense ... about half the BBC want
On 5 July 2010 07:51, Mikko Rantalainen mikko.rantalai...@peda.net wrote:
So, you're arguing that DRM is not required, right?
I'm arguing that it can't possibly make sense. And that standardising
a DRM is not something anyone sensible should touch.
Especially, the content distributors
Harding
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 1:00 AM
To: wha...@whatwg.org
Cc: Andy Berkheimer
Subject: [whatwg] More YouTube response
Glad to see my post spurred some good discussion - I'll try to address topic
by topic below, but one of the great points made is that some of the
functionality YouTube
John Harding jhard...@google.com schrieb am Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:59:37
-0700:
1. Standard Video Format
[…]
On the current path, a content provider knows
that by offering H.264 and WebM, they can reach all HTML5-capable
browsers. This honestly is a reasonable state for YouTube right now
- we
On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 17:45 +0200, Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote:
John Harding jhard...@google.com schrieb am Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:59:37
-0700:
1. Standard Video Format
[…]
On the current path, a content provider knows
that by offering H.264 and WebM, they can reach all HTML5-capable
The company I work for, VOD.com (sfw) (aka Hotmovies .com and clips .com -
nsfw (spaces added)), offer video on demand services to thousands of
studios. Our sites are central locations for customers who want to watch
something - this is a service in itself. We handle encoding and content
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
Practically, I think the ball is / was in Apple's court to decide this.
While to this day other browser makers have decided to ship two (!)
royalty-free video formats (Theora and VP8),
Internet Explorer 9 will not support VP8 unless the user manually
installs the codec. This puts it at the same level of support as
Safari has for Theora, as far as I know. So even if we assume every
user upgraded to the latest alphas of the browser they used, H.264 is
supported by about 65%
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Shane Fagan shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.comwrote:
Internet Explorer 9 will not support VP8 unless the user manually
installs the codec. This puts it at the same level of support as
Safari has for Theora, as far as I know. So even if we assume every
user
It's the iPhone and especially the iPad which has really pushed the adoption of
HTML5 video. And afaik, you can't install WebM on them. To me (and my company)
that's where the issue lies.
Mike Wilcox
http://clubajax.org
m...@mikewilcox.net
On Jul 5, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Shane Fagan wrote:
On 07/05/2010 04:46 PM, Shane Fagan wrote:
For windows maybe there should be a .exe/.msi with the entire package of
VP8+Theora+Vorbis or just VP8+Vorbis to make it easier to install
There is:
http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/oggdsf/opencodecs_0.84.17315.exe
Shane Fagan shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com schrieb am Mon, 05 Jul 2010
17:20:12 +0100:
If I remember correctly and dont ask me for a link to where I read it
but the problem is still patent suits I believe. MPEG-LA as soon as
they heard about the VP8 codec open sourcing they said they were
Nils Dagsson Moskopp nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net
schrieb am Tue, 6 Jul 2010 00:42:13 +0200:
May Apple engineers on this list chime in and tell us if patent
uncertainity is still an issue ? AFAIK neither Google, nor Mozilla,
nor Apple have had difficulties.
s/nor Apple/nor
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Marques Johansson marq...@displague.com wrote:
The company I work for, VOD.com (sfw) (aka Hotmovies .com and clips .com -
nsfw (spaces added)), offer video on demand services to thousands of
studios. Our sites are central locations for customers who want to watch
something
On Jul 5, 2010, at 13:10, Marques Johansson wrote:
For the content that is not protected the download or stream is metered so
the client can be charged only for the time they spent watching the content.
We error on the customer's side for things like buffering and misreported
play
Lachlan Hunt lachlan.h...@lachy.id.au wrote:
On 2010-07-02 21:01, John Harding wrote:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Lachlan Huntlachlan.h...@lachy.id.auwrote:
As Henri pointed out, major content producers already broadcast their TV
shows and movies over the air without DRM.
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:09 PM, John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
Yes, it's pretty straightforward to offer iframe-based embed code, but it
needs to be coupled with getting sites to accept them, or we end up with a
lot of confused, unhappy users.
This will only happen if the iframe
On 4 July 2010 13:57, bjartur svartma...@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see how BBC would be harmed by the usage of alternative
software. Its business model is about content, not software, right?
See, you're using logic and sense ... about half the BBC want to just
*make their stuff available*,
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 23:56 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
On 4 July 2010 13:57, bjartur svartma...@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see how BBC would be harmed by the usage of alternative
software. Its business model is about content, not software, right?
See, you're using logic and sense ...
David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 July 2010 13:57, bjartur svartma...@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see how BBC would be harmed by the usage of alternative
software. Its business model is about content, not software, right?
See, you're using logic and sense ... about half the BBC
John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
Rather than ask browsers to get into the DRM
business,
what I think would work best is having a means for 3rd party DRM
providers
to supply browser plug-ins which implement the video tag for
protected
content - not all that different than selecting a
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:59 PM, John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
2. Robust Video Streaming
Andy Berkheimer on our team has been putting some thought into this, so I'll
defer to him for more specific proposals. For an app like YouTube, it is
extremely useful to have fine-grained control
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 02:37 -0700, Henri Sivonen wrote:
John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
Rather than ask browsers to get into the DRM
business,
what I think would work best is having a means for 3rd party DRM
providers
to supply browser plug-ins which implement the video tag
If the seek method was further hookable it should be possible to add decrypt
or transcode methods to interpret the fetched content, possibly requesting
more data to the filter stream bucket, before apending the bytes of media.
On Jul 2, 2010 6:10 AM, Marques Johansson marq...@displague.com
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:13:00 +0200, Shane Fagan
shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Well this isnt really a list where we should talk about the dos and
donts of web content distribution. DRM content can be embedded in the
video tag and decoded using installable plugins so its not really an
On 02.07.2010 13:38, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:13:00 +0200, Shane Fagan
shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Well this isnt really a list where we should talk about the dos and
donts of web content distribution. DRM content can be embedded in the
video tag and decoded using
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 13:38 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:13:00 +0200, Shane Fagan
shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Well this isnt really a list where we should talk about the dos and
donts of web content distribution. DRM content can be embedded in the
video
If there were hooks for handling the bytes being requested and
supplied to the media object, would you agree that DRM modules could
be written with Javascript (if a bit of a straw man - as all DRM is
perceived to varying degrees)? I think this could prevent the need for
some plugins.
On Fri, Jul
On 2010-07-02 13:56, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 02.07.2010 13:38, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:13:00 +0200, Shane Fagan
shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Well this isnt really a list where we should talk about the dos and
donts of web content distribution. DRM content can be
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Lachlan Hunt lachlan.h...@lachy.id.auwrote:
On 2010-07-02 13:56, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 02.07.2010 13:38, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Whether playing video requires a plugin is very much an issue for this
list, I think. What Henri explained -- not having
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Lachlan Hunt lachlan.h...@lachy.id.au wrote:
On 2010-07-02 13:56, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 02.07.2010 13:38, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:13:00 +0200, Shane Fagan
shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Well this isnt really a list where we
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+...@gmail.comsimetrical%2b...@gmail.com
wrote:
As several people pointed out (and which I tried to get at in my post),
this
is really an ecosystem issue rather than a change needed in the spec or
in
browsers. I suspect it's going
On 2010-07-02 21:01, John Harding wrote:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Lachlan Huntlachlan.h...@lachy.id.auwrote:
Correct. Vendors can theoretically implement any codec or container they
like, with any features or limitations they like.
MP4 already has various DRM schemes in use...
I would
On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:09 PM, John Harding wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+...@gmail.com wrote:
As several people pointed out (and which I tried to get at in my post), this
is really an ecosystem issue rather than a change needed in the spec or in
On Jul 2, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
Any site which does that has a giant security hole, since Flash can be used
to arbitrarily script the embedding page. It's about as safe as allowing
embedding of arbitrary off-site script. If you are aware of sites that
allow
Glad to see my post spurred some good discussion - I'll try to address topic
by topic below, but one of the great points made is that some of the
functionality YouTube needs from browsers probably doesn't belong in the
HTML5 spec (e.g. streaming, content protection). I'm happy to take those
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:59 PM, John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
Some of the discussion here seems to have conflated application-controlled
video delivery with content protection, but in an ideal world, the two are
independent. The basic requirements around content protection that we
57 matches
Mail list logo
