[ogg-dev] OggYUV

illiminable ogg at illiminable.com
Wed Nov 9 00:51:51 PST 2005

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Arc" <arc at Xiph.org>
To: <ogg-dev at Xiph.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: [ogg-dev] OggYUV

> On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 01:14:08PM +0800, illiminable wrote:
>> >I agree, which is why I wrote the OggPCM draft when we already have 
>> >FLAC.
>> >These
>> >formats are not difficult to design or implement, and I think the added
>> >efficiency and simplicity will more than make up for it.
>> Which i looked at... and i'm wondering why on earth it has a sync code in
>> the packet... that's the whole point of putting it in a container.
> Um, data packets consist of a 32-bit header followed by PCM data.  Where 
> did you
> get the idea that "sync" data was in the packet?

That's what the first 32 bits of "header" are.

> I don't understand why a compromise is needed, as you already said that 
> you're
> not going to use OggStream in your DirectShow filters, insisting on 
> continuing
> to re-invent the wheel.  I don't care either way, since while I understand 
> it's

That doesn't mean that the files won't ever end up, on a windows machine, 
and how is what you are doing not re-inventing the wheel.

> As I said in the last email on this subject, if at some point you (or some 
> other
> Windows developer) decides that a generic Ogg DirectShow filter is 
> benefitial,

There already is a generic filter.

> KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid.  This is a raw data format.  It's value to
> everyone is primarily how simple it is to implement.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Yes... it's a raw data format... and 
look at the header you've given it.

Anyway... carry on. I'll just do my own thing.


More information about the ogg-dev mailing list