20192 2012-11-30 22:21:03 +0000 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#default-sizing means we can drop all mentions of 300x150 (here and elsewhere) 2013-06-07 21:26:18 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED FIXED http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-video-element P3 normal Unsorted 1 contributor ian ian jackalmage mike zcorpan contributor oldest_to_newest 79218 0 contributor 2012-11-30 22:21:03 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/ Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#the-video-element Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#the-video-element Comment: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#default-sizing means we can drop all mentions of 300x150 (here and elsewhere) Posted from: 76.102.14.57 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_8_2) AppleWebKit/537.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/23.0.1271.95 Safari/537.11 83054 1 ian 2013-02-12 22:20:35 +0000 Where does the value "300" end up if we do this? 83114 2 jackalmage 2013-02-13 18:45:54 +0000 You do still need to define the 300x150 "default object size" in HTML as applying to the sizing of images/etc. 83124 3 ian 2013-02-13 22:40:40 +0000 Ah. Then I don't understand what this bug is asking for. Can you elaborate? (assuming you are the one who filed it) 83126 4 jackalmage 2013-02-13 23:05:26 +0000 I did not file it, no. 85056 5 zcorpan 2013-03-27 13:53:02 +0000 I didn't file it either, but there's a difference between what the current spec says and if it were to say that the "default object size" is 300x150 for <video>. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2184 Opera and current spec: 300px Chrome, Firefox, IE9 and "default object size": 600px I suggest we change the spec to match implementation majority and hook in to the CSS spec with "default object size". 87232 6 ian 2013-05-04 00:20:37 +0000 I don't really understand what it means to define a "default object size" or where this would happen. I like the idea of aligning with implementations, I'm just not sure what this would entail in terms of spec edits. Can you elaborate? 87262 7 zcorpan 2013-05-06 13:00:09 +0000 For <video>, change [[ The intrinsic width of a video element's playback area is the intrinsic width of the poster frame, if that is available and the element currently represents its poster frame; otherwise, it is the intrinsic width of the video resource, if that is available; otherwise it is 300 CSS pixels. The intrinsic height of a video element's playback area is the intrinsic height of the poster frame, if that is available and the element currently represents its poster frame; otherwise it is the intrinsic height of the video resource, if that is available; otherwise it is 150 CSS pixels. ]] to [[ The intrinsic width of a video element's playback area is the intrinsic width of the poster frame, if that is available and the element currently represents its poster frame; otherwise, it is the intrinsic width of the video resource, if that is available; otherwise it is missing. The intrinsic height of a video element's playback area is the intrinsic height of the poster frame, if that is available and the element currently represents its poster frame; otherwise it is the intrinsic height of the video resource, if that is available; otherwise it is missing. The default object size [CSSIMAGES] is 300 CSS pixels wide and 150 CSS pixels high. ]] 88917 8 ian 2013-06-07 21:25:13 +0000 Thanks. I looked around in the spec for other places where I defined intrinsic dimensions in that way, but couldn't find any. Feel free to open new bugs if there are some I missed. 88918 9 contributor 2013-06-07 21:26:18 +0000 Checked in as WHATWG revision r7935. Check-in comment: Coordinate with CSS Images better http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7934&to=7935