- From: Michiel Toneman <michiel@apenstaartje.nl>
- Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 12:06:33 +0100
- To: Jack Jansen <jack@oratrix.nl>
- CC: www-smil@w3.org, discuss@apps.ietf.org
Jack Jansen wrote: >> The rationale for picking audio/basic was that it >> is widely supported in SMIL players today, and doesn't >> require paying a license fee. >> >> If you know of another license-free, widely >> supported audio format with better >> characteristics than audio/basic, that may be >> interesting. > > > AIFF could be an alternative. If I remember correctly there are different > mimetypes for aiff (uncompressed) and aifc (compressed) the aiff format > doesn't suffer of the WAV problem of having a gazillion different options for > compression scheme. It does (theoretically?) allow for choices in samplesize, > sampleencoding (int/float/ulaw) and such, but at least it isn't open-ended. How about the Ogg/Vorbis format? It doesn't suffer from the horrendous patenting/licencing issues associated with MPEG1 layer 3/ TwinVQ / AAC etc... It is also already supported by many encoders/decoders, and is set to be the format of the future. Disadvantage for your purpose may be that like JPEG/MPEG/etc.. it is a lossy compression format (don't know if that is relevant). See: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/index.html
Received on Wednesday, 13 December 2000 06:07:06 UTC