[theora-dev] Re: Ogg IETF standard (was: Re: [vorbis-dev] application/ogg statusupdate)

[Silvia.Pfeiffer at csiro.au]

Hmm, I know what you mean. I've actually taken these sentences out of
Monty's specifications. The first one refers to the page size of max.
~64 kByte and the second one to the logical subdivision of packets into
segments of 255 Byte size. I'm not sure how to rephrase that properly
though. Maybe it's good as it stands: that it is recommended to have 4-8
kByte size, but expected more commonly to be 50-200 Byte? I'm not
experienced enough to make anyone of these statements. Monty, your take?

Cheers,

Silvia.

<p>Erik Stenborg wrote:
> 
> I skimmed parts of the text and found one contradiction:
> 
> "  From Ogg's perspective, packets can be of any arbitrary size,
>    although a nominal size of approximately 4-8 kByte is recommended.
> [...]
>    The encoding is optimised for speed and the expected case of the
>    majority of packets being between 50 and 200 bytes large. "
> 
> /Erik
> 
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2002 Silvia.Pfeiffer at csiro.au wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > sorry for cross-posting, but I believe both developer communities should
> > be interested in this.
> >
> > In order to get Ogg accepted as application/ogg MIME type, there was a
> > requirement by the IETF to get an RFC written on the Ogg encapsulation
> > format. I have now authored a draft of that document and would like to
> > get input from the community and especially from Monty. Linus and I
> > would like to submit it asap to IETF (their next meeting is next week).
> > Please could everybody help me to make sure I have not made any
> > mistakes!
> >
> > In addition, as I have copied many words and paragraphs from the online
> > documents, which I presume were authored by you, Monty, I would like to
> > suggest to include you as author in this RFC.
> >
> > Let me know what you think ...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Silvia.
> >
> >
> > Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Linus,
> > >
> > > I'm just wondering how much further you got with writing the RFC on the
> > > Ogg stream/file format (and of course the RFC on the application/ogg
> > > MIME type).
> > >
> > > I would like to offer my help in writing an RFC on the "Ogg media
> > > encapsulation format" and in pursuing it with the IETF for
> > > standardisation. We could e.g. write up a document in RFC-compliant
> > > format (see RFC2629) rather quickly by using the "xml2rfc" tools
> > > provided by IETF.
> > >
> > > I believe this effort is necessary and an excellent way to further the
> > > publicity of Ogg and all the related media encoders. I'd be very happy
> > > to get involved as I'd like to support the excellent efforts of this
> > > community.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Silvia.
> > >
> > > Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 Silvia.Pfeiffer at csiro.au wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > are you planning to write an RFC on the Ogg file format or on the ogg
> > > > > vorbis encoding format? Also, are you thinking about getting
> > > > > audio/ogg-vorbis and video/ogg-vp3 registered as mime formats?
> > > >
> > > > I have written an RFC for the application/ogg MIME type, so to support
> > > > this I might have to write an RFC for the Ogg stream/file format. I yet
> > > > don't know if I have to do that though, as my aim was primarily to get the
> > > > mimetype registered.
> > > >
> > > > There is a definition for audio/vorbis that will be common for both RTP
> > > > streamed "raw" vorbis and Ogg-packaged vorbis. However it is not yet
> > > > finished, some guy in Finland is working with it.
> > > >
> > > > Noone has thought about video/theora (as I think it should be named) and
> > > > with the extreme complexity that has surrounded the RTP version of Vorbis
> > > > I really don't know which way to go with that. Any suggestions?
> > > >
> > > > Linus Walleij
> >
> >
--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'theora-dev-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.