HTML5/SMIL integration [was: Re: ISSUE-10: suggest closing]

[Jim Jewett]

> We had this input from the SYMM WG on December, 2007:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Dec/0219.html

> This linked to a detailed comparison, but there was apparently little
> interest in changing HTML5 <video> to be more like SMIL, since the
> message received no replies and there was no follow-up.

I am explicitly not a video or audio expert, but I went through the
differences list at
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/2007/12/SMIL-AudioVideoControlConcepts.html

The most important differences do seem to have been resolved.  (That
draft seems to be primarly discussing a elements with @src, but
without <source> elements.)

The next most important differences seem to be cases where HTML5 has
made an intentional simplification.  The SMIL standard has some
additional advantages for a very motivated author, but it does make
senes to defer those enhancements until the next release.

There were also a few naming differences listed.  It would be best to
resolve these if possible, but as best I could tell, HTML5 has already
resolved them by just dropping the attribute entirely from this
version; I have no idea whether legacy concerns will prevent the use
of SMIL names if they are re-added in a future HTML version.

-jJ

[Dick Bulterman]

Hi all,

For some reason, the progress on the list never filtered over to me --
probably my fault. Sorry.

On the HTML5/SMIL integration, it is clear that there are two objectives
from the SMIL team:
- avoid confusion
- encourage interoperability.

Things that do the same things in HTML5 & SMIL should be aligned, and
the differences should be made clear.

Unfortunately, I'm away from both my office and a computer this week (on
a sailboat), so it will take a few days for me to round things out. I'll
send off comments at the beginning of the week of 24 August.

Regards,
Dick Bulterman
co-chair, SYMM

[Michael(tm) Smith-4]

Dick Bulterman <Dick.Bulterman@...>, 2009-08-17 08:51 +0200:
[...]
>  Unfortunately, I'm away from both my office and a computer this week (on a
>  sailboat), so it will take a few days for me to round things out. I'll send
>  off comments at the beginning of the week of 24 August.

The team members of the W3C Interaction domain had a discussion
about this issue on our weekly call, and I took an action to
request that it be kept open pending receipt of Dick's review
comments next week.

Also, it seems that the scope of the discussion about issue-10 has
expanded to include more than just the question "how similar
should SMIL and <video> attribute names be?" (the current title of
the issue). We could open up a new issue with a more broadly
scoped title, but I'd suggest that rather than doing that, the
issue be re-titled instead.

Dick, You also might want to consider attending the HTML WG telcon
on Thursday, August 27 to talk about your review comments.

  --Mike

--
Michael(tm) Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike/

[rubys]

Michael(tm) Smith wrote:

> Dick Bulterman <Dick.Bulterman@...>, 2009-08-17 08:51 +0200:
> [...]
>>  Unfortunately, I'm away from both my office and a computer this week (on a
>>  sailboat), so it will take a few days for me to round things out. I'll send
>>  off comments at the beginning of the week of 24 August.
>
> The team members of the W3C Interaction domain had a discussion
> about this issue on our weekly call, and I took an action to
> request that it be kept open pending receipt of Dick's review
> comments next week.

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/135

> Also, it seems that the scope of the discussion about issue-10 has
> expanded to include more than just the question "how similar
> should SMIL and <video> attribute names be?" (the current title of
> the issue). We could open up a new issue with a more broadly
> scoped title, but I'd suggest that rather than doing that, the
> issue be re-titled instead.
>
> Dick, You also might want to consider attending the HTML WG telcon
> on Thursday, August 27 to talk about your review comments.
>
>   --Mike

- Sam Ruby

[Maciej Stachowiak]

On Aug 18, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:

> Dick Bulterman <Dick.Bulterman@...>, 2009-08-17 08:51 +0200:
> [...]
>> Unfortunately, I'm away from both my office and a computer this  
>> week (on a
>> sailboat), so it will take a few days for me to round things out.  
>> I'll send
>> off comments at the beginning of the week of 24 August.
>
> The team members of the W3C Interaction domain had a discussion
> about this issue on our weekly call, and I took an action to
> request that it be kept open pending receipt of Dick's review
> comments next week.
>
> Also, it seems that the scope of the discussion about issue-10 has
> expanded to include more than just the question "how similar
> should SMIL and <video> attribute names be?" (the current title of
> the issue). We could open up a new issue with a more broadly
> scoped title, but I'd suggest that rather than doing that, the
> issue be re-titled instead.
>
> Dick, You also might want to consider attending the HTML WG telcon
> on Thursday, August 27 to talk about your review comments.

I'll leave this issue open until Dick has a chance to comment. If his  
comments are broader than attribute names, then I agree a new issue  
may be more appropriate.

Regards,
Maciej