PDA

View Full Version : New HTML api's



lruc
11-23-2008, 02:16 PM
I just read on Wikipedia that HTML 5 is planning to have new video and audio api's. Is this really nessesary? Not all machines support things like that, and besides, isn't that what flash is for?

CornedBee
11-23-2008, 02:55 PM
I just read on Wikipedia that HTML 5 is planning to have new video and audio api's.
And the Firefox 3.1 Betas actually support it (partially).


Is this really nessesary?
Yes.


Not all machines support things like that,
An UA need not actually support video and audio output and can still claim compliance with HTML5, as long as it has the correct fallback behavior.


and besides, isn't that what flash is for?
1) More machines support video than support Flash.
2) Flash is a proprietary format, subject to the whims of Adobe.
3) Flash requires installation of a plugin.
4) Flash only supports .flv videos, which use proprietary codecs.

whiteflags
11-23-2008, 03:11 PM
Note that an API is an application programming interface, which allows you to program something for the web, using a language. As an example, I think Yahoo has an API so that you can integrate Yahoo search into whatever bigger web project you have. Clearly not what you are thinking of.

The relevant section of the article is


HTML 5 provides a number of new elements and attributes that reflect typical usage on modern Web sites. Some of them are technically similar to <div> and <span> tags, but have a meaning, for example <nav> (website navigation block) and <footer>. Such tags would facilitate indexing by search engines and handling by small-screen devices or voice readers for the visually impaired.[citation needed] Other elements provide new functionality through a standardized interface, such as the <audio> and <video> elements.[3]


I used to make web pages frequently, and take it from my experience that these are welcome changes. A standard interface for music and video is a godsend since, currently, you have to use the object containers with unintelligible jibberish like clsid= attributes and parameter tags.

Flash is a tool but it shouldn't be the only option. Flash video and sound quality, frankly, sucks. People can watch their favorite shows online now as TV stations try to connect with more internet addicted, computer affluent audience. It's not too hard to imagine that they would like a simple interface to bring high quality streaming to their audience.

I have confidence that if broadband internet speeds, video cards, and processors aren't ready for this now, then they will catch up in short order; there is also no reason to assume that every web site is interested in providing this kind of content. It is very much a wait and see situation in terms of what happens in practice.

lruc
11-23-2008, 04:09 PM
Alright you guys got me. I never even thought of this:
An UA need not actually support video and audio output and can still claim compliance with HTML5, as long as it has the correct fallback behavior.
Do you think XHTML 2 will also include these api's? I hope they do.

CornedBee
11-23-2008, 04:24 PM
Do you think XHTML 2 will also include these api's?
At this point, I very much doubt XHTML 2 will ever come into existence. You may be thinking of the XML serialization of HTML 5 (informally called XHTML 5), which is just another way of writing HTML5.

lruc
11-23-2008, 06:20 PM
At this point, I very much doubt XHTML 2 will ever come into existence. You may be thinking of the XML serialization of HTML 5 (informally called XHTML 5), which is just another way of writing HTML5.

It's a shame if what you say happens...

CornedBee
11-24-2008, 10:28 AM
Perhaps. XHTML2 has some nice ideas. But the incredible sluggishness of the working group led, I believe, to its dissolution.

maxorator
11-24-2008, 10:33 AM
Oh well. I'll just keep using XHTML 1.1. :)