W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2007

[whatwg] several messages regarding Ogg in HTML5

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:47:17 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0712120836370.7107@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, alex wrote:
> >
> > We have to take into accounts the needs of everyone. This includes 
> > large companies. If large companies will only accept codecs that 
> > they've already implemented, then that may have to be one of the 
> > criteria.
> 
> This conflicts with:
> 
> > Whatever solution we find will be one that is royalty free and open. 
> > That is not in any doubt.
> 
> You can't have it both ways. 

We could, if one of the codecs that was implemented by large companies 
(e.g. H.264 Baseline) was made available royalty-free.

It could also be the case that the aforementioned large companies will 
accept a compromise that doesn't involve a codec they already implement.

Currently there is no known solution. That's why we're in this mess. But, 
as they say, top people are working on this.


> > If the text moves to requiring a non-free codec, then you will have 
> > been screwed, and then you should raise almightly hell. However, no 
> > such decision has been made (and no such decision will ever be made, 
> > at least not while I'm involved).
> 
> Pfew, can we get a signed copy of that? :P

It's already in the spec:

# [...] we need a codec that is known to not require per-unit or 
# per-distributor licensing, that is compatible with the open source 
# development model [...]


> The way i see it there are 3 possibilities so far:
> - use ogg, possible (but negligable) risk of submarine patents

This is basically as acceptable to companies like Apple as H.264 is to the 
free software community.


> - use extremely old technology

Unfortunately this is unlikely to give us the quality we desire, but it is 
possible that we will have to compromise on this option.


> - use another free codec which has a 100% guarantee that there are no
> patentholders lurking
> 	this does not exist (afaik)

Indeed.


> At the end of the day, I think little choice remains except ogg.

Ogg isn't a choice, unfortunately. I agree that little choice remains, 
though. But this is an open issue, and experts in the field are actively 
trying to resolve it to everyone's satisfaction.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2007 00:47:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:38 UTC