We are using the newest release version of JWPlayer (6.8). We encountered a Bug in the Player:
This html snipped is not valid in the case of a html5 doctype: In the official version of the w3c validator, this snipped is invalid, because of the % sign in the width and height attribute, and also because of the attribute bgcolor, which is not allowed in the object element at all.
And Willie, the poster isn't creating the <object> tag - JW Player is creating it. And JW Player in Flash mode is producing exactly the code the poster has laid out here, complete with the HTML errors he's identified.
If you don't believe me, take a look at this simple, plain-vanilla demo page:
Before you even launch the player, pull up your web developer tools and take a good look at the <object> tag that JW Player has created in the "myElement_wrapper" div.
The current productive demo system is available at http://www.opencourseworld.de
On the first page, you will find the embedded JWPlayer with the invalid width, height and bgcolor attributes in the surrounding object html element tag. All attributes are added automatically by the JWPlayer.js and cannot be changed.
I stumbled on this page while preparing to log a similar issue.
I have a minimal page here: http://vdgsa.org/pgs/mp4/aov/test.html
To reproduce errors: 1. Turn on Firebug 2. Copy the html source using Firebug (select HTML tab, right-click on <html>, copy html) 3. Paste into W3C Html validator 4. Add <!DOCTYPE html> at top 5. Validate
You will see some 10 errors in the html generated by JW Player. Am I doing something wrong?
Yes, I did that. Those are the other errors that were reported in addition to the x-webkit-airplay=“allow” issue.
However, is this a huge problem? Does it prevent the player from working? Does it break anything on your site?
A good reference is the x-webkit-airplay=“allow” issue, which is actually something that is needed for iOS devices, and even though the w3c doesn’t recognize it, and thus doesn’t pass validation, it is something that is required.
Hi Ethan, as this problem leads to failing automatic tests checking the validity of our HTML code, does your last comment mean "this issue will be fixed in the release 6.9"? Can you give already a release date of 6.9?