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

[whatwg] on codecs in a 'video' tag.

From: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 17:15:23 +0900
Message-ID: <p0623093bc22fd404dfe0@[17.202.35.52]>
At 6:40  +1000 28/03/07, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>Hi Dave,
>
>On 3/28/07, Dave Singer <singer at apple.com> wrote:
>>  >>  We really feel that the HTML spec. should say no more about video and
>>>>   audio formats than it does about image formats (which is merely to give
>>>>   examples), and we should strive independently for audio/video
>>>>   convergence.  We'd really like to discuss the 'meat' of the proposal --
>>>>   the tags, the CSS, and so on!
>>>
>>>The whole point of the spec is to make sure implementations are
>>>compatible.  Just discussing the "meat" and ignoring how things work out
>>>in practice may backfire.
>>
>>I think the example of SVG (a 'markup' language) having a codec
>>requirement that 3GPP then had to explicitly write-out is
>>instructive.  The attempt there didn't work.
>
>I would be curious for the reasons that 3GPP has taken the requirement
>of vorbis out of the spec. Was that a decision based on technical
>reasons and could you please explain what these technical reasons
>were?

It happened before my time, but I rather suspect that the answer is 
that 3GPP specifications have a set of required and recommended audio 
codecs (AMR, AMR wideband, AAC, AMR WB+) and that there was neither 
need nor desire to add to the terminal load a new codec.  Someone 
would need to come to 3GPP and convince the membership it's in their 
commercial interests to require (and thus implement) a new audio 
codec over and above the current required and recommended set, and I 
doubt that anyone even tried.
-- 
David Singer
Apple Computer/QuickTime
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2007 01:15:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:54 UTC