Comments on: Get rid of those YouTube EMBED tags http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/ Dexterity Unlimited presents articles about web design and web site architecture. Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:48:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Svet and Kyle Keeton http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Svet and Kyle Keeton Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:31:08 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-29 Thank you for telling about <b>Flowplayer</b>, I was looking for such service for a long time! One more problem with YouTube is that they force people to delete their good videos... Thank you for telling about Flowplayer, I was looking for such service for a long time!

One more problem with YouTube is that they force people to delete their good videos…

]]> By: Dan Johnson http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-28 Dan Johnson Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:52:11 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-28 Increase YouTube Views said: <blockquote>It is very difficult to convince someone that he/she is not using the right code or stuff according to standards.</blockquote> Yes, I've definitely found this to be difficult. Fortunately, things have been changing. Unfortunatly, the changes are very slow. One change that I was very glad to see was the adoption of the <a href="http://www.dhs.state.il.us/page.aspx?item=32765" rel="nofollow">Illinois Information Technology Accessibility Act (IITAA)</a>. This law requires state agencies and universities to ensure that their web sites, systems, and other information technologies are accessible to people with disabilities. In the state's guidelines for web sites' compliance with this law is a section that I truly appreciate: <blockquote>1. Coding 1.1 - Use valid, standard web programming code. <strong>What:</strong> The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) sets and publishes standards for web programming languages including HyperText Markup Language (HTML/XHTML), and Cascading Style Sheets (CSS). Programming code is considered "valid" when it follows the rules and conventions specified in the published standards. <strong>Why:</strong> Valid code is the foundation for accessibility. Screen readers and other assistive technologies most reliably interpret and interact with web pages that are built using valid, standard code. <strong>How:</strong> For web pages, indicate the programming language you are using by starting your code with a standard document type declaration, such as: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> See the full list of W3C Recommended Document Type Declarations (http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html). Use the W3C HTML Validation Service (http://validator.w3.org) to check your code. <strong>Ref:</strong> WCAG 3.2, 11.1, 11.2</blockquote> Increase YouTube Views said:

It is very difficult to convince someone that he/she is not using the right code or stuff according to standards.

Yes, I’ve definitely found this to be difficult. Fortunately, things have been changing. Unfortunatly, the changes are very slow.

One change that I was very glad to see was the adoption of the Illinois Information Technology Accessibility Act (IITAA). This law requires state agencies and universities to ensure that their web sites, systems, and other information technologies are accessible to people with disabilities. In the state’s guidelines for web sites’ compliance with this law is a section that I truly appreciate:

1. Coding
1.1 - Use valid, standard web programming code.
What: The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) sets and publishes standards for web programming languages including HyperText Markup Language (HTML/XHTML), and Cascading Style Sheets (CSS). Programming code is considered “valid” when it follows the rules and conventions specified in the published standards.

Why: Valid code is the foundation for accessibility. Screen readers and other assistive technologies most reliably interpret and interact with web pages that are built using valid, standard code.

How: For web pages, indicate the programming language you are using by starting your code with a standard document type declaration, such as:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">

See the full list of W3C Recommended Document Type Declarations (http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html).
Use the W3C HTML Validation Service (http://validator.w3.org) to check your code.

Ref: WCAG 3.2, 11.1, 11.2

]]> By: Dan Johnson http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-27 Dan Johnson Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:28:36 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-27 Kim said: <blockquote>Any suggestions before I delete the lot and go back to non standard tags?</blockquote> This is an interesting problem. The <a href="http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/player_parameters.html" rel="nofollow">YouTube Embedded Player Parameters</a> seem like a good place to start. It isn't clear to me yet whether YouTube is pulling the parameters from the full URL provided in the <code>movie</code> parameter, or from the <code>data</code> attribute in the <code>object</code> tag. Perhaps a good way to try this out would be to leave off everything after the question mark in the URLs, and provide the parameters you want in the <code>param</code> tags within the <code>object</code> container, like this: <code><param name="rel" value=”false” /></code> YouTube indicates using <em>both</em> of these techniques at the same time, so adding the <code>rel=0</code> to the URL and providing the <code>param</code> tag should solve your immediate problem. Please let me know if this works. It's interesting to see what we are or are not able to do with YouTube. On a side note, I've also experimented with <a href="http://flowplayer.org/" rel="nofollow">Flowplayer</a>, an embedded flash video player that allows you to host your own FLV videos on your site and display them as you wish. This might be a good alternative if you don't have a problem with the amount of bandwidth you could use, or you have videos that you for one reason or another can't have on YouTube. Kim said:

Any suggestions before I delete the lot and go back to non standard tags?

This is an interesting problem. The YouTube Embedded Player Parameters seem like a good place to start. It isn’t clear to me yet whether YouTube is pulling the parameters from the full URL provided in the movie parameter, or from the data attribute in the object tag.

Perhaps a good way to try this out would be to leave off everything after the question mark in the URLs, and provide the parameters you want in the param tags within the object container, like this:

<param name="rel" value=”false” />

YouTube indicates using both of these techniques at the same time, so adding the rel=0 to the URL and providing the param tag should solve your immediate problem. Please let me know if this works. It’s interesting to see what we are or are not able to do with YouTube.

On a side note, I’ve also experimented with Flowplayer, an embedded flash video player that allows you to host your own FLV videos on your site and display them as you wish. This might be a good alternative if you don’t have a problem with the amount of bandwidth you could use, or you have videos that you for one reason or another can’t have on YouTube.

]]> By: Kim http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-26 Kim Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:49:23 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-26 I used your code on a bunch of videos on my site. I added rel=o at the end of the line, for instance, http://www.youtube.com/v/XevObuXbOMg&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0. Usually when you add this it stops you tube displaying a slide show of other related videos (just get a replay button) When I did it with your code it made it much worse, now I get a search box, the embed code, the url as well as the wretched slide show. Any suggestions before I delete the lot and go back to non standard tags? I used your code on a bunch of videos on my site. I added rel=o at the end of the line, for instance, http://www.youtube.com/v/XevObuXbOMg&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0.

Usually when you add this it stops you tube displaying a slide show of other related videos (just get a replay button)

When I did it with your code it made it much worse, now I get a search box, the embed code, the url as well as the wretched slide show.

Any suggestions before I delete the lot and go back to non standard tags?

]]> By: Increase Youtube Views http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-25 Increase Youtube Views Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:33:38 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-25 TO be very true, A large part of our sites is not valid and up to mark according Xhtml. I have to go through the similar situation regarding meta tags of a site and owner of the site was using everything invalid. It is very difficult to convince someone that he/she is not using the right code or stuff according to standards. Anyhow thanks for sharing the tip. TO be very true, A large part of our sites is not valid and up to mark according Xhtml. I have to go through the similar situation regarding meta tags of a site and owner of the site was using everything invalid. It is very difficult to convince someone that he/she is not using the right code or stuff according to standards. Anyhow thanks for sharing the tip.

]]> By: Dan Johnson http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-9 Dan Johnson Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:47:22 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-9 Andy Beard said:<blockquote>Have you tested the valid code with various feed readers and additional sites such as Myspace, forums etc?</blockquote> Do you mean displaying the video within the feed reader? I suppose it depends on the multimedia functions built into the reader. I'm using Opera for reading my feeds, so there's no problem there. I think perhaps we should test this. The code <em>was</em> a bit difficult to get to render properly in WordPress: I ended up making the post nearly all one single line of text in order to get the formatting to stay the way I wanted. Myspace videos seem to use nearly the same code in their videos. I haven't tested one yet. Andy Beard said:
Have you tested the valid code with various feed readers and additional sites such as Myspace, forums etc?

Do you mean displaying the video within the feed reader? I suppose it depends on the multimedia functions built into the reader. I’m using Opera for reading my feeds, so there’s no problem there. I think perhaps we should test this.
The code was a bit difficult to get to render properly in WordPress: I ended up making the post nearly all one single line of text in order to get the formatting to stay the way I wanted.
Myspace videos seem to use nearly the same code in their videos. I haven’t tested one yet.

]]> By: Andy Beard http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-8 Andy Beard Wed, 08 Oct 2008 21:57:10 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-8 Have you tested the valid code with various feed readers and additional sites such as Myspace, forums etc? Have you tested the valid code with various feed readers and additional sites such as Myspace, forums etc?

]]> By: Dan Johnson http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-7 Dan Johnson Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:19:26 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-7 Mel: Great questions regarding the accessibility of the multimedia objects. I've found several resources for information about this, but most of it seems to be at least a couple years old. One of the better is the cached version of a <a href="http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:9hAkez4QjhoJ:weblogs.macromedia.com/accessibility/archives/2005/08/in_search_of_a.cfm+%2Baccessibility+%2Bembed+%2Bobject+%2Bvalidate&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a" rel="nofollow">Macromedia Accessibility Blog</a> which tests several embedded object techniques on a variety of browsers (including Firefox 1.0.4, JAWS 6.20.065, etc.). Perhaps this issue needs to be revisited with additional testing accross platforms/browsers/techniques. There is a good <a href="http://www.webaim.org/techniques/flash/techniques.php" rel="nofollow">article on Accessible Flash techniques</a> at WebAIM. What about the accessibility of YouTube's Flash object itself? Posting cross-site objects can be very problematic for accessibility. I think hosting the video on your own site gives you the most control, but how many of us can afford the bandwidth associated with that? Mel:
Great questions regarding the accessibility of the multimedia objects. I’ve found several resources for information about this, but most of it seems to be at least a couple years old. One of the better is the cached version of a Macromedia Accessibility Blog which tests several embedded object techniques on a variety of browsers (including Firefox 1.0.4, JAWS 6.20.065, etc.). Perhaps this issue needs to be revisited with additional testing accross platforms/browsers/techniques. There is a good article on Accessible Flash techniques at WebAIM.
What about the accessibility of YouTube’s Flash object itself? Posting cross-site objects can be very problematic for accessibility. I think hosting the video on your own site gives you the most control, but how many of us can afford the bandwidth associated with that?

]]> By: Dan Johnson http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-6 Dan Johnson Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:48:05 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-6 Dave said:<blockquote>So what?<br /><br />Who uses XHTML anyway? EMBED is valid in HTML, and will continue to be valid for a very long time.</blockquote> Actually, the <code>EMBED</code> tag has never been a part of the HTML specifications, whether HTML 4.01 or XHTML. It is proposed as part of the HTML 5 specs, but I don't even want to think about getting into that mess. Dave said:
So what?

Who uses XHTML anyway? EMBED is valid in HTML, and will continue to be valid for a very long time.

Actually, the EMBED tag has never been a part of the HTML specifications, whether HTML 4.01 or XHTML. It is proposed as part of the HTML 5 specs, but I don’t even want to think about getting into that mess.

]]> By: Dave http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/get-rid-of-those-youtube-embed-tags/6/comment-page-1/#comment-5 Dave Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:39:32 +0000 http://www.dexterityunlimited.com/articles/?p=6#comment-5 So what? Who uses XHTML anyway? EMBED is valid in HTML, and will continue to be valid for a very long time. So what?

Who uses XHTML anyway? EMBED is valid in HTML, and will continue to be valid for a very long time.

]]>