Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-10-25 Thread Silvia Pfeiffer
Just a further note on this since I have received a few private concerns: On 10/24/07, Silvia Pfeiffer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The new way: Vorbis audio alone in Ogg container source src=audio.ogg type=audio/ogg; codecs=vorbis or source src=audio.oga type=audio/ogg; codecs=vorbis

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-10-25 Thread Ian Hickson
Thanks for the help on RFC4281 stuff, I've updated the spec to match. On Sun, 14 Oct 2007, Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves wrote: This information is not accurate anymore according to the Internet Draft[1] Xiph is working on to help solve the mess. video/ogg should be used for any kind of visual

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-10-23 Thread Silvia Pfeiffer
Xiph has taken on board the many comments received over the last years wrt MIME types and file extensions and is working on this more appropriate I-D for MIME types cited by Ivo. Here is what effect it has on the WHAT-WG spec: The spec: Theora video and Vorbis audio in Ogg container source

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-10-15 Thread Dave Singer
At 7:38 + 13/10/07, Ian Hickson wrote: When the first element of a value is 'avc1', indicating H.264 (AVC) video [29], the second element is the hexadecimal representation of the following three bytes in the sequence parameter set NAL unit specified in [29]: 1) profile_idc, 2) a byte

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-10-14 Thread Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves
On 10/13/07, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Recent discussion at Xiph around http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4281 suggests the use of the following parameters: # application/ogg; codecs=theora, vorbis for Ogg Theora/Vorbis files # application/ogg; codecs=theora, speex for Ogg

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-10-13 Thread Ian Hickson
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote: Since giving guidance in the spec itself is more likely to lead to vendors and authors understanding codecs parameter than expecting them to follow normative references, I think the spec should document the correct source element type attribute

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-12 Thread Kevin Marks
On 4/11/07, Dave Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We had to settle on one type that was valid for all files, to deal with the (common) case where the server was not willing to do introspection to find the correct type. We decided that audio/ promises that there isn't video, whereas video/

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-12 Thread Silvia Pfeiffer
On 4/12/07, Dave Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 12:12 +1000 11/04/07, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: On 4/11/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't it be simpler to use video/ogg and audio/ogg as the base types here? That would already tell you the intended disposition. Please

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-12 Thread Ralph Giles
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 05:45:34PM -0700, Dave Singer wrote: But [video/*] does at least indicate that we have a time-based multimedia container on our hands, and that it might contain visual presentation. application/ suffers that it does not say even that, and it raises the concern that

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-12 Thread Charles Iliya Krempeaux
Hello, This reminds me of when Lucas Gonze was arguing that MIME types (and Content Types) were dead. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/message/48276 See ya On 4/12/07, Kevin Marks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/11/07, Dave Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We had to settle

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-11 Thread Thomas Davies
For the case of a bitstream format change, there is version information in the header of a theora bitstream. Major and minor version numbers are being used similarly to the way that *nix library version numbers work - anything with a minor change is backwards compatible, but a major change

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-11 Thread Dave Singer
At 12:12 +1000 11/04/07, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: On 4/11/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't it be simpler to use video/ogg and audio/ogg as the base types here? That would already tell you the intended disposition. Please note that rfc4281 also mentions the problem that

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-10 Thread Silvia Pfeiffer
Hi Charles, Dave, On 4/10/07, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, On 4/9/07, Dave Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Theora video and Vorbis audio in Ogg container. (application/ogg; .ogg) * Dirac video and Vorbis audio in Ogg container. (application/ogg; .ogg) *

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-10 Thread Dave Singer
At 18:33 +1000 10/04/07, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: Recent discussion at Xiph around http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4281 suggests the use of the following parameters: # application/ogg; codecs=theora, vorbis for Ogg Theora/Vorbis files # application/ogg; codecs=theora, speex for Ogg Theora/Speex

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-10 Thread Ralph Giles
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 11:21:10AM -0700, Dave Singer wrote: # application/ogg; disposition=moving-image; codecs=theora, vorbis # application/ogg; disposition=sound; codecs=speex what is the 'disposition' parameter? The idea of a 'disposition-type' is to mark content with presentational

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-10 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Apr 10, 2007, at 11:58 AM, Ralph Giles wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 11:21:10AM -0700, Dave Singer wrote: # application/ogg; disposition=moving-image; codecs=theora, vorbis # application/ogg; disposition=sound; codecs=speex what is the 'disposition' parameter? The idea of a

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-10 Thread Silvia Pfeiffer
On 4/11/07, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 10, 2007, at 11:58 AM, Ralph Giles wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 11:21:10AM -0700, Dave Singer wrote: # application/ogg; disposition=moving-image; codecs=theora, vorbis # application/ogg; disposition=sound; codecs=speex what

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-09 Thread Dave Singer
WARNING: I have CC'd the co-authors of the RFC, as I think they might like to see the discussion, comment on my answers, and possibly correct me. I also have a question whether there is a typo in the RFC... * * * * * Henry these are all great questions. Let me see how many I can answer.

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-09 Thread Charles Iliya Krempeaux
Hello, On 4/9/07, Dave Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WARNING: I have CC'd the co-authors of the RFC, as I think they might like to see the discussion, comment on my answers, and possibly correct me. I also have a question whether there is a typo in the RFC... * * * * * Henry these are

Re: [whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-09 Thread Dave Singer
At 11:59 -0700 9/04/07, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: Hello, On 4/9/07, Dave Singer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WARNING: I have CC'd the co-authors of the RFC, as I think they might like to see the discussion, comment on my answers, and possibly correct me. I also

[whatwg] Give guidance about RFC 4281 codecs parameter

2007-04-08 Thread Henri Sivonen
The video element is designed to accommodate codec-based fallbacks based on MIME types. The reasonable codec extension mechanism for browsers is using the facilities of the timed media framework of the underlying operating system (QuickTime on Mac OS X, DirectShow on Windows and gStreamer