4 ms·

Why not allow third parties to perform playing <video> tag?

• wmf 17y ago
  Mozilla won't allow any kind of plugins for <video> because they want to force you to use Theora. You're getting freedom, and you're going to like it. (Because who doesn't want freedom?) The cost of the H.264 license is not the issue.
  • Qz 17y ago
    Now you're just making assumptions. As far as I know, there isn't a single browser that uses plugins for displaying elements defined as part of the HTML specification. With <video> as part of the HTML5 spec, any browser supporting HTML5 is supposed to render <video> tags without relying on 3rd party support. This is the entire reason for <video> existing in the first place.
    • wmf 17y ago
      I don't think this is an assumption: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2010/01/video_freedom_a.html http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2010/01/video_fr... http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2009/06/directshow_and.html http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2009/06/directsh... I always thought it was a mistake that <img> wasn't extensible (e.g. Mozilla would display PNG with <img> but for IE you'd need <embed> or <object>) and I think that mistake is being perpetuated with <video>.