On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 17:36 -0800, Michaelwagner wrote: > pfarrell Wrote: > > there is no evidence that there is any official ID3 spec > Well, there is this web site: http://www.id3.org
Yes, there is, but there is no evidence that it is official. No list of members, no list of meetings, > > or process for revision, or design for upward compatibility, etc. I've > > not ever seen a reference to even a committee meeting between the > > interested parties.Truly the antithesis of an open and transparent process > > ... > > As far as I can tell, it's just one guy writing the standards, although > there is some kind of mailing list ... Real standards either glom onto an existing standards body, like IEEE, W3C, OSI, ietf, etc. or are setup by a group of vendors who usually trademark the name, logo, etc. In any case, you can't just say you are compliant without doing whatever the standards body says. I agree that it looks like one guy is trying to coordinate and publish the standards. And he (or she) deserves thanks for the effort. But as a standard for someone to use to write working and interoperable code, ID3 is terrible. Maybe the worst that I've ever tried to work with. (and I have worked with ANS.1, SET, and other really wonderfully bad specs). -- Pat http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
