[Vorbis-dev] Re: [ogg-dev] Peer review draft for the new media types/file extensions

Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves justivo at gmail.com
Thu Oct 4 15:43:36 PDT 2007

Following thread's feedback, I'm updating the file, and I'll soon
commit the revised version to SVN.  From there, I guess final
fixes/patches may be applied by anyone instead of reporting.

Some thoughts:

How to better describe executable content and security considerations
regarding it?  Trust only content that is certified through SSL/TSL?

Mac Type Code.  I've been reading about it, and it seems to be a
pre-OS X standard that is to be/has been replaced by Uniform Type
Identifiers[1].  No idea then if it's worth to keep the four letters
Type Code in our registration proposal.  If it is, I guess OggX, OggV,
and OggA will do.

More below.

On 10/4/07, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> It is expected that .oga will break players that
> interpret them as .ogg files - but that's not a problem because they
> will not even want to open a .oga file. As soon as .oga support is
> implemented in the player, it will parse the skeleton track and know
> what's inside and then use the appropriate audio decoder.

Then is it expected that oggenc will be updated with a -oga switch
where a Skeleton track is added?  Instead of music.ogg, it would
output music.oga with a Skeleton track?

Speaking of Skeleton, what is the correct way to define it?  As in,
"this file has a Skeleton track".  Is Skeleton presence in Ogg always
described as a "track"?


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Type_Identifier

More information about the ogg-dev mailing list