[advocacy] is this list active?

[Arc Riley]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 09:36:56AM +0000, Daniel James wrote:
> 
> I'll email it to you off-list then. It's a PDF because vector artwork 
> needs a vector format, and PDF is widely readable. When working as a 
> designer I used Adobe Illustrator for this kind of job, but this PDF 
> was produced in OpenOffice Draw. If anyone wants the OO file they can 
> have that as well, but they would need to install the right fonts.

I don't think I can view them properly with xpdf, the fonts appear 
blocky (not vector) and don't scale.  

However, they appear to be the same as the ones which appear at 
http://www.marevalo.net/OggLogos/ (at the bottom).  I personally prefer 
the ones at the top, as they look more unique.  I used his Ogg Theora 
logo in one of theora's testspec.ogg files (in CVS), pasted on top of a 
TV colorbar test pattern.

Some criticisms about this logo-scheme, however... one of the goals we 
have, and it's looking like a really close reality, is that "Ogg" may 
contain any number of different codecs and played seamlessly by any Ogg 
player.  That is, any file can contain any combination of muxed or 
chained Vorbis, Theora, Flac, Speex, Writ, Midi, etc etc etc and "just 
works" the way Quicktime or WMV "just works" with any of their codecs.

"Ogg Vorbis" is a thing, yes.  It means an Ogg file with just Vorbis, to 
be compatable with the spec, and important for branding hardware 
devices which support it.  "Ogg Theora" is also such a thing, as the 
spec describes it as Theora+Vorbis only.  Ogg Speex/FLAC are less used 
(btw, FLAC is an acronimn, so it's all caps) in an Ogg container because 
they're less useful that way (this will change as Icecast gains support 
for streaming them, whereas it'll need the Ogg container).

So while codec-branding for specific products which support just the one 
codec is justified, I think we need to really concentrate on branding 
"Ogg" as it's own thing, and begin to phase codec-specification out of 
the marketing.

At the same time, I don't think the "Ogg" (only) logo is sufficient 
because it contains no context.  Yea, MP3/WMV/etc have got their 
branding down, but three letters and some blank space does not make a 
logo.  I think it's also important to label the difference between "Ogg 
Vorbis", "Ogg Theora", and a more complex muxing of different codecs.
Prehaps call it "Ogg1"?  or "Ogg I", or even "Ogg" with "one" in small 
letters above the two g's and a "I" roman numeral behind the set?  Or 
any other name which sets apart "Ogg with multiple codecs" from the 
others that involves more than dropping the codec names from the logo...

In referece to the OggCast suggestion, I think Icecast is a brand on 
it's own right and supports Ogg better if it uses that brand recognition 
just as "Darwin Stream Server" supports Quicktime.

We had this discussion while putting together IceShare, while talking 
about calling it OggShare instead since it's designed to work with only 
Ogg streams.  The outcome of this was the concept that calling it 
OggShare makes Ogg sound like it's own world, "Ogg" this, "Ogg" that, in 
reference to various tools and servers that work with it.  In the both 
the audio and video industry the format is commonly seen as a 
side-issue, deadlines and budgets often dictate what gets used.  If 
they end up using IceShare because it requires no royalties and works 
efficiently therefor saving them bandwidth they'll use it, and with it, 
Ogg. This isn't because IceShare is hostile towards non-Ogg formats, as 
programs like "Darwin Stream Server" is about non-Quicktime formats, but 
because the primary advantage IceShare gives is that it works on the Ogg 
page level instead of arbitrary (meaningless) byte chunks.

But again, in all seriousness, people use what works.  They tend to 
become loyal to what they are currently using, and from that, may go 
further and read about the royalty-free stance of Ogg and it's codecs.

Atleast that's how I've seen it. :-)  I'd love to hear other opinions on 
the matter...
--- >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.