[whatwg] codecs and containers

[James Justin Harrell]

--- Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves <justivo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Those are fairly big words by someone who seems to have no idea what
> they're talking about.

I was just going by the story I've heard. If it's not true, I apologize for spreading
misinformation.

> Ogg is highly
> scalable and able to contain any kind of data, including executable
> and scrippted applications, digital signatures, DRM, and anything else

I've heard several times that Ogg is hard coded to only work with certain types of codecs, and
thus can't work with new codecs without being updated first. Is that also incorrect?

I'm surprised to hear that Ogg supports DRM. Nokia made a fuss recently about the W3C supporting
Ogg, and many seemed to think it was because of Ogg not supporting DRM.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/09/2045200

> Do you mean perhaps in pirate releases of Japanese anime coupled with
> patented video technology?  Yeah, I'll give you that.  Otherwise, no.
> You will find more legal Ogg video on the web than Matroska video.

You could be right. I only know that I personally have very rarely come across Ogg video, while
I've seen lots of Matroska video. If the WHATWG and the W3C want to put the interests of legal
content providers before the interests of pirates, I won't complain.