June 2009 is not "current". That issue (of making one or another codec <i>mandatory</i> in the HTML5 spec) is dead with decision you linked, for the reason that "<i>if a browser 
refuses to implement something, then we can't require it</i>".<p>I'm being pedantic here, but I think it's very misleading to connect the spec issue with your conclusion that &#60;video&#62; <i>could</i> have been nice but somehow <i>isn't</i>. Had one or the other codec been made mandatory in the spec, the <i>reality</i> today would be exactly the same.