[Xiph-Advocacy] Fwd: [whatwg] Video codec requirements changed

[Conrad Parker]

On 11/12/2007, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2007 10:27 PM, Conrad Parker <conrad at metadecks.org> wrote:
> >From: Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch>
> >> I've temporarily removed the requirements on video codecs from the HTML5
> >> spec, since the current text isn't helping us come to a useful
> >> interoperable conclusion. When a codec is found that is mutually
> >> acceptable to all major parties I will update the spec to require that
> >> instead and then reply to all the pending feedback on video codecs.
>
> > One day before the W3C Video on the Web workshop, the codec
> > recommendations have been removed from the HTML5 draft :-(
>
> One might wonder what he meant by "mutually acceptable" that the prior
> recommendation failed, but the actual diff
> (http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=1142&to=1143) doesn't
> leave any doubt:
>
> "and that is not an additional submarine patent risk for large companies."
>
> I hate to be rude, but if the W3C is going to enter the business of
> legal speculation then perhaps it ought to retain its own neutral and
> independent legal council for this purpose.

On the other hand, the new wording also specifies:

 "...; we need a codec that is known to not require per-unit or per-distributor
  licensing, that is compatible with the open source development model, that is
  of sufficient quality as to be usable, ..."

which actually makes the case for Ogg stronger. The previous draft stated no
such requirements. As no rationale was given for choosing Ogg, that
recommendation was easy to attack, hence the flamewars on the whatwg list.

cheers,

Conrad.