[foms] Just Arrived
silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Wed Nov 10 13:18:55 PST 2010
Welcome! It's great to have you here.
There have indeed be some discussions around WebM/Matroska for HTTP
adaptive streaming, but we're more broadly discussing a solution that
would work for any video encapsulation format - though with a focus on
the ones supported in typical HTML5 browsers.
For reading the archives, I'd suggest starting at
and just clicking "next message". Just about everything that has been
sent since then was related to HTTP adaptive streaming.
Jeroen is mostly pulling everything together, which is awesome. He is
right now preparing a proposal that can be discussed at the WHATWG and
eventually go into HTML5, which is why the wiki page that Jeroen cited
is at whatwg.org. While we want to eventually get to a full proposal
which includes a manifest file format and full implementation in the
browser, right now it seems the first step will be to create an API to
a means of telling the browser to play "chunks", where the definition
of "chunks" may be a URL to a media resource and a start/end time
therein, will implementation of adaptive HTTP streaming solutions in
create the remainder of the solution.
Just thought I should expand a little on what Jeroen already wrote. :-)
Looking forward to hearing your opinions!
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Steve Lhomme <slhomme at matroska.org> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> I just subscribed to this list in hope I can help with all the
> adaptative streaming in HTML5 videos (and audio as well). I am the
> (main) creator of Matroska, one of the basis of WebM. And from day one
> my main concern for WebM's success has been that it misses that
> adaptative streaming part, which is key to a good video experience in
> a browser.
> I used to work for CoreCodec and have done a good amount of my work
> there was handling video streams over HTTP, including YouTube ones,
> for CorePlayer, a very efficient mobile video player. And IMO video in
> mobile web browsers is important for the future. And it can only work
> well by taking in account the highly varying nature of bandwidth.
> The archives are a little tricky to navigate (efficiently), so I'll
> jump on conversations when I see fit. Pardon me in advance if I
> propose things that have already been discussed... Is there any online
> resource that describes the progress of some kind of specs that would
> have arised from the discussions here ?
> foms mailing list
> foms at lists.annodex.net
More information about the foms