[theora] theora and xml

Silvia Pfeiffer silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Sun Dec 6 02:03:32 PST 2009

On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Tom Sparks <tom_a_sparks at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> --- On Sun, 6/12/09, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [theora] theora and xml
>> To: "Tom Sparks" <tom_a_sparks at yahoo.com.au>
>> Cc: "ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com" <ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com>, theora at xiph.org
>> Received: Sunday, 6 December, 2009, 11:18 AM
>> Ok, there are many organisations that
>> are wanting to use different
>> kinds of rights description languages.
>> But it's the software around it that is important.
>> If there is only software to work with the xml files, then
>> why throw
>> it into a ogg file?
>> You could as well distribute the xml and the ogg file
>> separately with
>> the xml file pointing at the ogg file.
>> All existing tools deal with that. Packaging might be as
>> simple as a tarfile.
>> I'm asking from the point of view of having tried putting
>> metadata
>> into binary media files and having spoken with e.g. Adobe
>> about this
>> and hearing everywhere that it's a lot easier to keep the
>> xml files
>> and the binary media files separate. For example, the
>> workflow
>> processes can all deal much easier with this - and programs
>> have no
>> problem with these either.
> OK, so I put the CMML in the Theora, and put the REL XML in its own file

That's one way. But you don't even have to put the CMML into Ogg - it
won't have applications to use it either. You can keep it as an
external XML file, too, and with the way that you have combined CMML
and the XML rights descriptions, you've actually created timed rights,
which I believe is quite novel.


More information about the theora mailing list