On Sunday 08 April 2007 21:00:25 strk wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 03:54:08PM +0200, Tomas Groth wrote:
> > We have two options as i see it. We can just using a non-flv file (ogm,
> > avi, etc), which is already supported by at least the ffmpeg-backend, and
> > for some filetypes also for the gstreamer-backend. This will also mean
> > that some of the function depending on the FLV-format will become
> > unavailable, but as such it wont require an extension of the SWF-specs.
> > The other options is to continue to use the FLV-format, but use the free
> > codecs instead of mp3 and H.263, and this will require an extension of
> > the SWF-specs.
>
> Is first option limited to dynamic loading or can also be used for
> embedding movies ? Generally speaking I'd postpone SWF format extensions to
> after we have a good free specs document finished but support everything
> possible w/out changing the specs (including for instance dynamic loading
> of PNG or other raster formats).
>
> I guess dynamic loading won't even need any SWF generator support for
> being immediately used ?
Depends on how such streams are loaded. Do you want to introduce a new AS
class and load the stream via http ? in such case no support from SWF
generators is needed.
But is such an extensions usefull w.r.t. interoperability ? I'd say a free SWF
implementation should not play the same games with users like proprietary
players do.
Defining new CodecIDs for free codecs and free players is unavoidable imho.
Klaus
_______________________________________________
Gnash-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
