[vorbis] tags in comment field - why?

[Glenn Maynard]

On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 01:56:45PM +0200, Beni Cherniavksy wrote:
> Erh...  Good point.  That's a question to Unicode, though.  Why did they
> do it this way?  I thought there is single glyph per unicode character but

It's a matter of HAN unification; I don't understand the issue quite
well enough to explain it, but you need to know the language of the text
to know which font to use.  
  http://www.unicode.org/unicode/faq/han_cjk.html
  http://www.cs.ruu.nl/~otfried/Mule/unihan.html
has some references, if you're interested.

> you know better...  What format can currently do better than unicode?  How

Nobody's suggesting anything other than Unicode.  This stuff's a little
inconvenient, but nothing more.  If we embed the language into the tags,
it's not an issue.

> does IE do it - it checks the language of the file?  Then what about a
> Japanese/Chinese mix?  Or does it check the LANG properties in HTML tags
> delimiting parts of the text?

Yep.  <p lang="jp">text</p>

> ID3v2 didn't fix it.  It's still more limited than vorbis tags.  I won't

I said that ID3V2 fixed ID3V1's major limitations.  I'm saying that we
shouldn't use a format that has the major limitations the current
proposals do, as to fix the limitations the format will need to be
completely replaced.

> speak for Monty on the original decision but using XML is overkill.

Why?  XML is simpler than defining your own data format from the ground
up.


-- 
Glenn Maynard

--- >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 'vorbis-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.