[whatwg] HTML 5, OGG, competition, civil rights, and persons with disabilities

[Manuel Amador (Rudd-O)]

> A decision was made to have the text reflect the facts that (a)
> no-one is happy with a 'should' and (b) that work is ongoing to find
> a solution (which might be Ogg, or something else).  That's all.

I may not be a W3C chair, but I'm pretty sure that if I disagree, then 
using "no-one" in your sentence is a lie.  And I'm not the only one.

> >Listen to what the people are saying.
>
> Oh, I am listening.  It's by no means clear that the Ogg crowd is at
> all.  I'm also spending efforts working on finding a solution.  I
> don't count lamenting "I want my ogg" on this list as spending
> efforts at all.

That's because you already found your solution: H.264.  Except that it's not 
an option.  Face it, "spending efforts on finding a solution" is a red 
herring, because if any codec was both good and patent-unencumbered (besides 
the Ogg technology family, of course):

- you'd already heard about it
- you could still wave your hands and say "nooooooo, it might be torpedoed by 
a submarine patent"

It's just stalling.
-- 

	Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) <rudd-o at rudd-o.com>
	Rudd-O.com - http://rudd-o.com/
	GPG key ID 0xC8D28B92 at http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/

It usually takes more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu speech.
		-- Mark Twain
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20071211/3ae3247b/attachment-0001.pgp>