Re: videomap

Juha Oinonen (
Sat, 21 Jan 1995 20:36:31 +0100

> I think the "x,y" coordinate for imagemaps was a quick hack that should be
> upgraded; it's very limiting. Extending it to video would be even more
> limiting.
I can see your point, but still, it would on my opinion be better
to have some kind of method to implement a videomap, than to have
none at all. That way, people could gain experience about the
concept and ideas for further development.
I guess the current imagemap feature will not be removed when
more sophisticated methods are developed. Similarly,
the videomap could be upgraded later.

> Newer approaches involve having the document specify a polygon which
> constitute an anchor in an image, along with associated attributes (e.g.
> destination URL, REL or REV tags, that sort of disposition information.)
> That way, browsers can clearly indicate which part of the image is a valid link
> and which is not, where it goes, whether it should pop up in a separate window
> or replace what you're watching, etc.
> I'd suggest extending that to video by just adding a couple of attributes to
> the polygon (starting time and ending time, in frames or whatever.)

I guess one should consider giving _two_ polygons, one for time
t0 (start) and the other for t1 (stop) , and the actual hit area
would be linearly calculated from the two polygons. Using just one
polygon doesn't take into account the fact that the "camera"
usually moves.




Juha Oinonen,

X.400: /GN=joinonen/OU1=cs/O=joensuu/ADMD=FUMAIL/C=FI