Flash alternatives

[Nathan Cerny]

On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday 09 September 2008 14:53:10 you wrote:
> > I think you need to define what you mean by HTML.
> > http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/tagpages/b/blink.htm
>
> It doesn't work that way. HTML is well-defined: http://www.w3.org/html/


Ah, so you DID mean the HTML standard and not HTML in general.  I'm not sure
what you mean by "It doesn't work that way" -- I didn't say it worked any
particular way.  I was simply giving a reference to the tag that lists
common browsers and who supports it and what quirks it may have.  Even if
something isn't in the HTML standard, a lot of browsers will still render
it.  Likewise, just because it's in the html standard doesn't mean that all
browsers will render it correctly.


> > It has in fact been supported by Netscape, it was supported in IE4 (and I
> > believe phased out after that).
>
> Irrelevant.


I was simply supplying this information for history.


> > It is part of the css1 standard (text-decoration: blink).
>
> "text-decoration" is a CSS attribute, not a HTML element.


I never said it was an HTML Element.  I said the same method was defined by
another web-standard.
However, under the CSS2.1 standard, all standards compliant browsers DO need
to support the blink tag and apply other css attributes to it.  They do not
have to blink the text contained inside the tag.


> On Tuesday 09 September 2008 15:03:56 you wrote:
> > You still need a renderer to display the video - whether you embed a java
> > object, a flash object, a Windows Media Player object, etc...you're still
> > going to leave out a segment of the crowd.  No matter what method you
> chose
> > you're still using a proprietary plugin - you just have to choose the one
> > you think the most people will have.  I think that's flash.
>
> Poor implementation is not my concern. An embedded video file is standard
> HTML
> and works just fine as-is in Konqueror with MPlayer Plugin.
>

That's a very narrow viewpoint and one that good web developers can't take.
 If your site doesn't work in a user's browser, they're not going to say
"Hey Safari, fix your browser" they're going to say "Hey web designer, fix
your site."  Also, I repeat that in the current HTML standard (4.1), there
is no such thing as a video tag.  You are referring to a tag that's defined
in the HTML5.0 draft.  They haven't even finished discussing supported
codecs for it.  So yes, Konquerer may play it how you want it to (using a
proprietary pluging), but once the standard is actually finished, Konquerer
may not support the standard at all, or it may behave completely different
than you expect.  Check http://www.w3.org/html/ for more information.  Under
the HTML 4.1 standard the only way to embed video is by using the object
tag.  Part of the object tag is the type attribute.  This type determines
what plugin is used to play the media.


-- 
Nathan Cerny

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One bright day, in the middle of the night, two dead boys stood up to fight.
Back to back, they faced each other. Drew their swords, and shot each other.
The deaf policeman heard the sound, and put those boys back in the ground.
If you don't believe this lie is true, ask Harry the blind man, he saw it,
too.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/attachments/20080909/4206b985/attachment.htm>