[whatwg] several messages regarding Ogg in HTML5
jeffm at iglou.com
Wed Dec 12 01:30:48 PST 2007
Ian Hickson wrote:
> Ogg isn't a choice, unfortunately. I agree that little choice remains,
> though. But this is an open issue, and experts in the field are actively
> trying to resolve it to everyone's satisfaction.
Yes, Ogg most certainly is a choice. Every time you deny this, you give
more weight for Apple, Nokia, et al to through around. Stop.
We do have the choice of saying that Ogg is the way forward, and that if
Apple, Nokia, et al don't want to implement it, then they can choose to
not be conformant to the new standard.
In my mind, this outcome is *far* superior to using a patent encumbered
codec, even if the patent holders grant a royalty free license on it
since the Ogg family have had so much research done on them that the
chances of submarine patents should be at least greatly reduced, if not
In short, I am absolutely sick and tired of big companies coming in and
throwing their weight around in standards organizations and getting
their end-user-screwing technologies embedded into supposedly open and
free standards. I've watched it happen in the past with the w3c, I've
watched it happen repeated in the IETF, I don't think I've ever seen it
*not* happen with ISO, ECMA seems *designed* to rubber stamp
end-user-screwing technologies. And, yes, Apple, I'm looking at you
here too. Your hands are not clean in this from past exercises. No, I
don't trust you, yes, I'm going to object loud and long to any move that
appears to be moving away from free and open technologies, which is what
Yes, I'm pissed. I'm taking an extreme position, but its a position of
principle, and I will not back down from it.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the whatwg