Hi, I recently had to integrate Youtube for a client and when visiting the media_youtube page I immediately saw the recommendation to use oembed instead and went with that. Bad move.

There are a fair few Youtube features that are not supported by oembed - the most crucial one is using a quality other than the default 480 x 270. On a lot of of sites where you need control over the output of your embedding you want to be able to specify whether your thumbnails should come in at full hd, 720p etc.

I accept oembed may be sufficient for most use cases however for many users who don't want to start rewriting strings using hook_media_oembed_request_alter this is still the best module for the job.

Some other module pages will offer recommendations but always list the caveats that going with a more generic solution entails - I'm suggesting that the same thing happen here.

Comments

codesidekick created an issue. See original summary.

Devin Carlson’s picture

Devin Carlson CreditAttribution: Devin Carlson commented
Status: Active » Closed (won't fix)

The message states that it is generally recommended to go with oEmbed over individual provider modules. I think it is fair to recommend an oEmbed-powered solution over individual provider modules as it is allows you to add support for a wide variety of providers to your site in a straightforward fashion using a single module that implements a widely used standard.

Having a single provider module is easier to maintain, more performant and will be easier to migrate in the future (D8 or otherwise).

There's a reason why oEmbed powers the embedded media solution in Wordpress. It handles the task well for most sites but individual provider modules that more tightly integrate with the platforms that they support will always be necessary.