[whatwg] Codecs for <audio> and <video> -- informative note?

Silvia Pfeiffer silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Tue Jul 7 03:00:59 PDT 2009

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:01 PM, David Gerard<dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/7/6 Jim Jewett <jimjjewett at gmail.com>:
>> "As of 2009, there is no single efficient codec which works on all
>> modern browsers.  Content producers are encouraged to supply the video
>> in both Theora and H.264 formats, as per the following example"
> A spec that makes an encumbered format a "SHOULD" is unlikely to be
> workable for those content providers, e.g. Wikimedia, who don't have
> the money, and won't under principle, to put up stuff in a format
> rendered radioactive by known enforced patents. Your wording presumes
> a paid Web all the way through.

According to http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Licensing,
the "W3C will not approve a Recommendation if it is aware that
Essential Claims exist which are not available on Royalty-Free terms".
So, until the time that H.264 is available royalty-free, I do not see
how it can be included - in particular since there is a royalty-free


More information about the whatwg mailing list