[whatwg] <video> element proposal
contact at nickshanks.com
Fri Mar 2 02:37:06 PST 2007
On 2 Mar 2007, at 10:01, Gervase Markham wrote:
> I think a base format is vital. With <img> we had de-facto standard
> formats because of what the first browsers supported. It took ages
> to get another one added (PNG) and it wasn't widely used until
> browser support firmed up.
> If a base format can't be guaranteed, people will just keep using
> Flash, which works almost everywhere (currently, with proprietary
> software only, but keep an eye on Gnash).
It may be a good idea to specify an either-or-both policy and include
a second video format, allowing vendors a little freedom as to which
Dirac (dirac.sf.net) seems like a good alternative format, but I
don't know what licenses are acceptable to closed-source browser
vendors. They say:
"As a defensive measure the BBC has applied for patent protection for
some techniques that are, or may be, used within Dirac. Our purpose
in doing so is to provide protection for Dirac from spurious patent
suits by other parties. Under the terms of the MPL we have licensed
these patents irrevocably and royalty free for use within the Dirac
"Our intention is that Dirac code be used as widely and as freely as
possible. This is why we have allowed re-licensing under the terms of
the GPL and LGPL licences."
And on Theora:
"Theora is coming on very nicely, and has an impressive, well-defined
spec. We think we have much better compression performance, but you
can't have too many free codecs."
"We intend to pack the Dirac elementary stream into MXF, which has
lots of useful features. That doesn't preclude it packing into Ogg
(or Matroska, or anything else) as well, and it's probably a good
idea to have a variety of packing formats."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2157 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the whatwg