[advocacy] Suggestion: Submit the Ogg Vorbis 1.0 Specification to the W3C

[Jose Ramirez]

Dave Hodder wrote:
>
> Only recently I was reading a Webmonkey article about the various web
> audio formats <http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/99/24/index4a.html>.
> Lamentably over the last few years the situation for the average web
> developer hasn't improved at all, in that there's still a plethora of
> standards competing with each other.
>
> Ogg Vorbis has many great things going for it, not least of which are
> it's cross-platform, patent-unencumbered nature.  It was of course
> designed to have all the hallmarks of an Internet standard.  The
> difficulty is, of course, pushing for it's adoption against the
> entrenchment of MP3 and the incoming threat of Microsoft WMA.
>
> This brings me, interestingly enough, to start thinking about PNG
> graphics.  The Portable Network Graphics format (also known as the PNG's
> Not GIF format) seems to have a certain amount in common with the Ogg
> Project.  For one thing, it was designed to be patent free; it also
> found itself vying for web space over the entrenched GIF.
>
> PNG development was led by an independent Internet-based group, rather
> than by some huge, faceless corporation.  It gained popularity, and in
> 1996 it became a W3C Recommendation, giving it a much stronger feeling
> of legitimacy and resulting in even more popularity.
>
> This, then, is where I'm coming from.  If the Ogg Vorbis specification
> can become a W3C Recommendation, it would be great for Ogg Vorbis, and
> (eventually) great for developers and users of the WWW.
>
> I won't pretend to be an expert on how the W3C works, but what does the
> Ogg community think about this as a suggestion?  Would it make sense for
> a key developer to approach the W3C's Document Formats Domain, with a
> view to producing a W3C Recommendation or Note?
>
> I'm sure there must be a thousand reasons why this can't or won't
> happen.  However, it's a Sunday afternoon, and I've been overcome by a
> rare surge of optimism.  Maybe one day Ogg Vorbis will have a nice
> shiny book published by O'Reilly, just like PNG.  ;o)
>
> Thank you for reading my little rant.  This is just a personal
> suggestion of my own, feel free to ignore.
>
> Dave

Hi Dave,
The W3C is progressing well with it's multimedia languages which include
versions of SMIL 2.0,
SMIL basic profile for mobile phone with MMS support, SMIL 2.0 profile
for RealONE and GRiNS (oratrix.com) and XHTML+SMIL for IE 6.0 (just a
W3C note right now). The languages are there, and as easy to use as
HTML,
what's missing is the open, free from license worries media. Vorbis
would fit the need for audio and there
the might be a new W3C working group for Time-text media.

http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/timetext.html

<p>If a player like RealONE would support Time-text, that means we have a
multimedia document that's easy to author and publish based on W3C
recommendations, add media formats like jpg, png, and ogg audio, that's
truly nonproprietary multimedia. This is when I think web multimedia
will take off, when everybody can use it, just
like HTML and how many HTML pages are there :)

Jose Ramirez

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'advocacy-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.