- From: Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils-dagsson-moskopp@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 08:37:24 +0100
Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> schrieb am Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:05:18 +1100: > Can the decision for a file format be taken completely separately from > the codec decision for the <audio> or <video> element, I wonder? I believe the royalties for encoders are usually higher than the royalties for decoders (where royalties apply, that is: with proprietary standards). Also, I doubt that any self-respecting entities opposed to the implementation of decoders for certain royalty-free A/V formats would include the corresponding encoders ? the risk being that more content would be created in formats that their own browsers could not render. > My assumption is that a StreamRecorder will get video (or audio) from > a device and it will be possible to hand it on to a <video> (or > <audio>) element for display. Since these elements supports specific > codecs, wouldn't that imply that the StreamRecorder needs to save it > in those formats, too? Unless, of course, we want to introduce some > kind of transcoding element that is plugged between a recorded stream > and a <video> (<audio>) element. I see your decodebin and raise you a fully self-aware media framework ;) Cheers, -- Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann <http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 230 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20101125/5c6ea9fb/attachment.pgp>
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2010 23:37:24 UTC