[theora] Extension .v+ogg does work
Charles Iliya Krempeaux
supercanadian at gmail.com
Tue Oct 24 23:12:42 PDT 2006
On 10/24/06, Ralph Giles <giles at xiph.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 01:53:10PM -0700, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
> > Hello Ralph,
> Hi Charles. Bumping into you in several places lately. :)
I get around :-)
> >From what I remember hearing (on the RSS Public mailing list --
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-public/ )... the "+" thing was
> > considered a hack. And it was intended to be a one-time hack... only
> > XML.
> Ok, thanks for the explaination. Interesting that the file browsers are
> using it. I found a bunch of bugs where other software had to be updated
> to handle the new type (as a literal, not a parsed description) but not
> the original reasoning for it.
> Note that we are using audio/x-vorbis audio/x-speex and video/x-theora
> in the RTP payload drafts. That's a different container with only one
> media type per stream, and it's important to know the actual codec, not
> just the disposition.
> > > http://www.advogato.org/article/852.html
> > I wrote that.... So... yeah that's a good proposal :-)
> Haha, oops. Sorry I didn't recognize your nick.
> > I also wrote this related proposal too...
> Thanks for the link. That seems a reasonable abuse for video rss
> feeds, and I guess you could use media="screen" for slides, but
> what do you do for audio?
For audio I believe something would have to made up. (I have yet to see any
specification mentioning anything appropriate for it.) "radio" seems like a
reasonable label (for audio) given we already have "tv" (for video).
BTW, media="screen" is the default. So, if you put nothing you get it
automatically. Normal text based webpages are considered media="screen".
My interpretation is media="screen" is meant for things that are suppose to
be "read". Which media="tv" is meant for things that are meant to be
"watched". And then media="radio" would be for things that are meant to be
> A free form typing system where defacto standard could emerge.
> Yes, "folksonomy" tagging would work about as well here in practice.
> Will be interesting to see if a standards-oriented body like the IETF
> ever ratifies something like that.
IMO, it would be pretty cool if they did. (Note sure if the majority of web
developers would take to it. But it would be interesting to give it a try.)
I think though that we'd probaby have to have people already using some
non-IETF format for this before the IETF would create a specification for
it. (Mainly because without existng usage, the people at the IETF would
probably not see a need for it.) (Although this is just me subjective
perception of things, and by no means fact.).
Kind of like without the existance of and widespread usage of RSS, the IETF
probably would not have accepted Atom being created through it.
Maybe we should create a new HTTP header in the vein of the HTML class
attribute. Maybe something like "X-Class". And we could have stuff like...
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
X-Class: video, r-rated, sci-fi, 640x480, ogg, theora
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
charles @ reptile.ca
supercanadian @ gmail.com
developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the theora