W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2008

[whatwg] Video codec requirements changed

From: Manuel Amador <rudd-o@rudd-o.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:36:29 -0500
Message-ID: <200801071336.29486.rudd-o@rudd-o.com>
Out of the question, it must be royalty-free.  That's one of the requirements, 
so unless you can convince the holder to go RF, no chance.

El Lunes 07 Ene 2008, Federico Bianco Prevot escribi?:
> Has anyone considered Bink video as a viable option?
> http://www.radgametools.com/bnkmain.htm
>
> >Bink is a "better-than-DVD" class codec - it compresses at higher
>
> quality than DVD
>
> >at up to three times the playback speed!
> >Bink uses up to 16 MB less memory at runtime than other codecs.
> >It has been licensed for over 3,800 games since 1999!
>
> It is not open-source, but the good thing is that the codec is
> licensed on a flat-fee basis.
>
> Quoting their internet site:
> >Our codecs are licensed on a flat-fee basis.
> >RAD doesn't charge royalties - period. You pay one flat-fee to use Bink
> >or Smacker in your product. 'Nuff said.
>
> I really couldn't find any comparison versus any other codec,
>
> compression and quality wise, but their site says:
> >Bink is the best quality codec available. Bink creates incredible
>
> looking video at extremely low
>
> >data rates. 256x192 animations for the Nintendo DS can be compressed
>
> all the way down to
>
> >50 kps and still look great. 640x480 animations can be crammed into
>
> 200 kps with little loss.
>
> >At higher data rates, Bink can play HD video (1280x720) at 900 kps
>
> (DVDs use a 1000 kps
>
> >data rate for 640x480 video).
>
> And even more important:
> >Another nice feature of Bink is that it's technology was completely
>
> independently developed.
>
> >We are not based on any MPEG or other committee standards (our
>
> techniques are quite
>
> >different, in fact) of any kind, so the IP is safe, encumbrance-free,
> >and (best of all) entirely royalty free.
>
> There are probably problems with open-sourcing it, but it might be
> worth trying to contact RAD and see if this could be a walkable road.
>
> -- Federico BP
>
> On Dec 11, 2007 3:39 AM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> > I've temporarily removed the requirements on video codecs from the HTML5
> > spec, since the current text isn't helping us come to a useful
> > interoperable conclusion. When a codec is found that is mutually
> > acceptable to all major parties I will update the spec to require that
> > instead and then reply to all the pending feedback on video codecs.
> >
> >    http://www.whatwg.org/issues/#graphics-video-codec
> >
> > --
> > Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> > http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> > Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'



-- 

	Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) <rudd-o at rudd-o.com>
	Rudd-O.com - http://rudd-o.com/
	GPG key ID 0xC8D28B92 at http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/

Now playing, courtesy of Amarok: Haddaway - What is love (7" mix)
Good night to spend with family, but avoid arguments with your mate's
new lover.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20080107/815415ce/attachment.pgp>
Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 10:36:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:00 UTC