giovanni said:CKurt said:*snip*Maybe you are right. It could be a "standard"alternative in case you don't have or want a specific plug in, but that would mean supporting two different formats at the same time (twice the work and the storage if you need the video files to be encoded in two formats for example).
It feels to me that this is just a way for Google and Apple (who pays the salaries of the editors of the standard) to force their own technology calling it a new standard.
Standards are the foundation of the internet, however relying exclusively on standards, I think, can be dangerous. There would be no incentive in developing better and richer solutions as the "standard" would be the "recommended" way.
From a more technical point of view, what do you think would be the good points of HTML 5 in comparison to Flash and Silverlight?
"Standards are the foundation of the internet, however relying exclusively on standards, I think, can be dangerous. There would be no incentive in developing better and richer solutions as the "standard" would be the "recommended" way."
In general I agree with this, but it's ridiculous to have to bring in an entire separate runtime in a plug-in just to watch a damn video on the web, when videos have become ubiquitous. Having an HTML element for it just makes sense.
But I'm all for Silverlight being there to challenge "you can program in any language as long as it's Javascript" ...
