W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Codecs discussion (was: Draft minutes 2010-09-15)

From: James Salsman <jsalsman@talknicer.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:08:45 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTinG_VZj3avLGbGEWL1FSqX+Uy_yK6okrYCkrOiK@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com, public-device-apis@w3.org
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote:
>
> There is very little reason to think that defining a default codec as
> part of an additional API would actually make browsers support that
> codec if they're not already supporting for other reasons

On the contrary, a format specification has always been a necessary
and sufficient precondition for all communications specifications, and
selection of a default format when there are a variety of possible
choices usually enhances the viability of such specifications (if it's
a useful format; more so if it suggests improved formats under varied
conditions, e.g. as the ;quality=[1,10] parameter of the audio/x-speex
type does.)

> HTML5 would be the most likely successful reason.

If the purpose of HTML5 is to replace Flash as, among other things,
the web technology which has been successfully transmitting audio for
years now, then Speex is still superior to the next best alternative
(Nellymoser) under a strict interpretation of that purpose.

Regards,
James Salsman
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2010 05:09:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:13 GMT