- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:38:43 -0400
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>, robert@ocallahan.org, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org
Hi, Maciej- Maciej Stachowiak wrote (on 7/2/09 7:26 PM): > > On Jul 2, 2009, at 3:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Maciej Stachowiak<mjs@apple.com> wrote: >>> Note also that besides patent risk, there are issues of coding >>> efficiency,availability of hardware implementations, >>> and hardware in already shipping devices. >> >> I still don't understand the hardware implementations argument. Are >> you arguing that we should use h.264 as base codec despite its patent >> situation? Or are you arguing that we should wait until there is some >> un-encumbered codec with hardware implementations before we have a >> base codec for the web? > > I think there isn't currently a single codec that satisfies everyone's > requirements. That may change over time. It will only change if: 1) patents expire (which will take too long) 2) we do something about it (or at least attempt to). Have the requirements of all the companies been collected somewhere? If not, we should do so. What are Apple's requirements? Maybe the thing we can change is those requirements. >Right now it looks like we have the makings of a format war, > and those often end up as lose-lose situations. Well, there's usually a short-term winner, or companies would simply cooperate. I don't think we should reward such behavior. The best way to avoid a format war is to find a video codec that can be mandated in the HTML5 spec, not to avoid the issue until it's too late. Regards- -Doug Schepers W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Thursday, 2 July 2009 23:38:55 UTC