- From: Joseph Daniel Zukiger <joseph_daniel_zukiger@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 22:06:18 -0800 (PST)
--- Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Joseph Daniel Zukiger wrote: > > > > Or, rather, if we knew that Apple (and others?) > would at least be > > willing to open their phones I think I said "phones" there? > > to 3rd party codecs. > (Yes, the third party > > codecs can be built, if the API for the container > is truly open.) > > This already exists -- there have been reports even > in this thread of Ogg > Theora plugins working with Apple's <video> > implementation. Which is part of the reason the independent developers feel antagonized, I'd guess. > This doesn't help with closed systems (e.g. iPhone), No news would be bad news, in this case. (But the notes from Dave and, I think, Macie, clarifying Apple's position are appreciated.) > and it isn't an ideal > situation -- we'd _like_ to be in a position where > all players can > implement the same thing without relying on third > parties. Flash survived a fairly long time while support in browsers was hit and miss. I distinctly recall having to download plugins for Shockwave, for instance (not to mention early versions of Flash, itself) and I _was_ working on MSWindows and Mac workstations at the time. > Failing that, though, it is true that third party > codecs can be the way to > a solution. It looks to me like the only solution as long as Nokia and whoever else insist on not being invited to the dance. > > After a little sleep, a suggestion occurs to me. > (I have not read all > > the subthreads, maybe it has been made already, if > so, mea culpa.) > > Incidentally, I must encourage everyone to read all > the messages before > posting. If you don't think everyone else's messages > are worth reading, > why should they consider yours worth reading? :-) I don't know. After reading about 150 messages from the various branches of this debate from the last month or so, my eyes glazed over, I got a headache, I decided I wanted some sleep, I had to go to work the next day, you know, meetings with teachers and such. If it makes you feel any better, I just finished reading the remaining 51 messages from the list that I hadn't read since the twelfth. There is a limit to how much homework you can ask of people (which is something that someone needs to convince the US Congress and patent office about). Besides, it (still) seems to me that those who are supporting Nokia's, et. al.'s positions keep dancing around the problems, with idealistic hopes that big money will resolve the issue painlessly. And, yes, it does seem to me that I never saw anyone make the exact suggestion I made, and I think everyone is getting hung up in precisely that lack of precision. Has someone made the precise suggestion I made? Specifically: (1) Require (MUST) a container/codec not known to be encumbered for the <video> tag. (2) Require an open plugin API for the browser, so that 3rd-party implementations can be dropped in, and allow the requirement of (1) to be met by a third party plugin. (3) Mention Ogg as an example of container/codecs which are not presently known to be encumbered. I guess I can see a problem with that if it turns out that someone can make ogg appear to be encumbered. So it would probably need (4) Allow the requirement of (1) to be waived, or commuted to the next best thing available under RAND terms in the event that there are no implementations not known to be encumbered. (Not known to be encumbered is possible. Known not to be Encumbered is not, and it would be difficult to require some specific degree of certainty about encumbrances without forcing implementors to pay some sort of very large bond, or to fund the research at a level which would be way out of reach for your local independent web monkey. (Hopefully, those who are doing the research on Ogg now will share their results so that the work doesn't have to be duplicated too very often.) I want to say this again, but reading these threads, I'm pretty sure Nokia (or some faction among their share-holders) is just engaging in a chest-beating exercise to see how much they can get the standard to give in what they might think is their direction. (Bad business, but there never seems to be any shortage of share-holders that think the market should be forced or played to their momentary profit.) joudanzuki PS: (5) Take this issue to the US Congress to explain how "strong" "IP" laws actually do interfere with innovation by anyone but 800 ton^H^H^H pound gorillas. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Received on Friday, 14 December 2007 22:06:18 UTC