2007-12-14 02:40 Ian Hickson:
I do not believe anyone has suggested we use H.264 as the common
codec.
I would support it as *a* common codec, if it only /must/ be
supported (transparently) when an underlying (plugin) framework,
operating system or hardware provides it, and otherwise only /should/
be supported. The same applies to other formats from MPEG and Ogg alike.
That leaves the encoding side, though.
As far as I can tell, there are no satisfactory codecs today.
For several, but not all definitions of 'satisfactory', yes.
If we are to make progress, we need to change the landscape.
If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts!? (Attributed to
Einstein.)
* Make significant quantities of compelling content available
using one
of the royalty-free codecs,
You Tube (or porn) is more important than Wikipedia in this regard.
so that the large companies have a reason to take on the risk of
supporting it.
* Convince one of the largest companies to distribute a royalty-free
codec, taking on the unknown liability, and make this widely
known, to
attract patent trolls.
For Opera doesn't seem large enough that only leaves two commercial
browser (and operating system) vendors. (Yes, I ignore the handheld
market.)
* Negotiate with the patent holders of a non-royalty-free codec to
find a
way that their codec can be used royalty-free.
I actually can imagine this happening, but only for playback.
* Change the patent system in the various countries that are
affected by
the patent trolling issue. (It's not just the US.)
That's the noblest, broadest and hardest approach I guess. Probably
the most expensive, too.
PS: What format for animated truecolor (alpha-channeled) bitmap
images should HTML5 recommend ('should') or require ('must')? ;)
