- From: King InuYasha <ngompa13@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 10:17:38 -0500
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj at stegny.2a.pl>wrote: > The VIDEO element will not be useless without a common decoder. Its > usefulness depends on its content: it will be limited to user agents that > support at least one encoding offered by the author. Even if a common > decoder is specified, many authors will not use it because they do not know > it, they do not have the tools, they are reluctant to learn or they consider > the proprietary solution better for production and valid for their target > audience. > > IMHO, > > Chris > Ahh, but the thing is, there ARE tools to make Ogg videos. And more would spring up if Theora was chosen as the common codec. Already quite a few proprietary and open source multimedia manipulation programs support the Ogg container and Ogg Vorbis codec out of the box. A good example being Nero Burning ROM. The thing is, the "audience" won't know the difference. To them, its just a faster player playing videos without crashing their browser or causing it to slow down at odd times. The content makers are not going to have a problem making Theora videos. Besides, most content making software use either DirectShow codecs or ffmpeg on Windows. On Mac, generally they use QuickTime codecs. And on Linux, usually GStreamer or ffmpeg is used. Since Theora/Vorbis codecs for all of those platforms are available, existing software would be able to output Ogg videos. And where the heck would "reluctant to learn" come from? This isn't a programming language, it is a codec! All they have to do is change the selection of codecs on the output of their video. As for "not knowing it," there is already some publicity on Ogg Theora videos from the Mozilla team. And Dailymotion has converted a portion of their library for the purpose of experimenting with it. Wikipedia/Wikimedia uses it already. The Internet Archive also uses it. There is no doubt that people already know it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090607/dd8c9b12/attachment.htm>
Received on Sunday, 7 June 2009 08:17:38 UTC