Have a look at the ongoing battles between MPEG4 and Ogg for the
browser video space. I don't know of your second criteria for b),
however - not many people are using Ogg (yet)
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/07/06/ogg-theora-h-264-and-the-html-5-browser-squabble/
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/07/decoding-the-html-5-video-codec-debate.ars
-Andrew
On 13-Jul-09, at 12:22 PM, Walter Lewis wrote:
Are there any blindingly obvious examples of instances where
a) a standards group produced a standard published by a body
which charged for access to it
and
b) a alternative standards groups produced a competing standard
that was openly accessible
and the work of group a) was rendered totally irrelevant because
most non-commercial work ignored it in favour of b).
My instinct is to quote the battle between OSI (ISO) and TCP/IP
(IETF RFCs). Does that strike others as appropriate?
Any examples closer to the library world?
Walter Lewis
