This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 24669 - Why is there a difference between IDL dimension attributes type for video compared with iframe/embed/object? And how is this difference expected to affect paging mechanism?
Summary: Why is there a difference between IDL dimension attributes type for video com...
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: WHATWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: HTML (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: Unsorted
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: contributor
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-02-14 20:10 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2014-02-21 22:40 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2014-02-14 20:10:14 UTC 
Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-map-element.html
Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#dimension-attributes
Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#dimension-attributes
Referrer: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/embedded-content-1.html

Comment:
Why is there a difference between IDL dimension attributes type for video
compared with iframe/embed/object? And how is this difference expected to
affect paging mechanism?

Posted from: 78.13.40.15 by master.skywalker.88@gmail.com
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/32.0.1700.107 Safari/537.36
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2014-02-14 21:11:00 UTC 
> Why is there a difference between IDL dimension attributes type for video
> compared with iframe/embed/object?

iframe/embed/object are legacy attributes, so we couldn't change them.

video is a new element, so we could do something that made sense.

Generally I try to remain consistent with old APIs, but here the old APIs just made no sense, and were inconsistent enough for other reasons that it seemed reasonable to just do the right thing.


> And how is this difference expected to affect paging mechanism?

What do you mean by paging mechanism?
Comment 2 anakin_rendine 2014-02-14 23:56:22 UTC 
(In reply to Ian 'Hixie' Hickson from comment #1)
> Generally I try to remain consistent with old APIs, but here the old APIs
> just made no sense, and were inconsistent enough for other reasons that it
> seemed reasonable to just do the right thing.
> 
> What do you mean by paging mechanism?
I agree with the new interpretation. Maybe I didn't know about the old one. So I don't catch, is there also a different interpretation between @width/@height as number (img and video) and @width/@height as DOMstring in the other elements? Or it's just a difference in the kind of values the browser expects and how it parses them?
Comment 3 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2014-02-20 20:53:44 UTC 
There's also some legacy differences, e.g. <img width="10%"> is handled differently than <img width="10#">.