W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2009

[whatwg] Codecs for <audio> and <video>

From: <jjcogliati-whatwg@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 05:36:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <37074.28663.qm@web63206.mail.re1.yahoo.com>



--- On Tue, 6/30/09, Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen at peda.net> wrote:

> (2) Specify {Theora or H.264} as the baseline. That way all
> vendors that
> have displayed any interest for <video> could
> implement the spec.
> Authors would be required to provide the video in both
> formats to be
> sure that any spec compliant user agent is able to display
> the content,
> but at least there would be some real target set by the
> spec. However, I
> think that this just moves the H.264 patent licensing issue
> from browser
> vendors to content authors: if you believe that you cannot
> decode H.264
> without proper patent license there's no way you could
> encode H.264
> content without the very same license. As a result, many
> authors will
> not be able to provide H.264 variant -- and as a result the
> Theora would
> become de facto standard in the future.
> 
> -- 
> Mikko
> 
Specify {Theora or H.264} AND {Motion JPEG}  That way there is a fallback mechanism when you care more about compatibility than bandwidth and don't want to deal with the hassle of the H.264 patents.  Sometimes compatibility is more important than bandwidth. (HTML is a common method of putting content on CD-ROMs.)

Josh Cogliati
Received on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 05:36:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:13 UTC