Re: Codecs for <video> and <audio>

Yes, I am kinda puzzled.  The fact that some formats are not suitable 
for all kinds of content doesn't make them unsuitable for use. 
Wave/PCM, and AVI/MotionJpeg+PCM are easily supported and OK for some 
uses (short content).

The downside to requiring them would be the implication that 
requirement implies recommendation, that's all.


At 21:13  +1200 30/06/09, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Ian Hickson 
><<mailto:ian@hixie.ch>ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>
>I didn't really see much value in having the section purely to require a
>
>small subset of WAVE functionality. WAVE in this context is only really
>useful during development, and since codecs are going to be a mess anyway,
>the author can just use whatever debugging-specific codec his main UA
>supports instead.
>
>
>Wave PCM is perfectly adequate for short sounds. It's fine for 
>auditory cues in user interfaces. It's fine for most sound effects 
>in games.
>
>(I've also received requests from browser vendors to not
>require WAVE support in the first place, though I have up to this point
>managed to convince them to keep WAVE support regardless.)
>
>
>That baffles me. I can't think of any reason someone would have a 
>problem supporting Wave PCM.
>
>Rob
>
>--
>"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our 
>iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and 
>by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, 
>each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him 
>the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah 53:5-6]


-- 
David Singer
Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.