[Vorbis] .ogg extension and Theora

[noprivacy at earthlink.net]

<20040617231837.GM23020 at griffon>
Message-ID: <006401c454ca$be843980$6a649c3f at computername>

From: "Greg Wooledge" <greg at wooledge.org>

>noprivacy at earthlink.net (noprivacy at earthlink.net) wrote:
>> Right.  OGM is just the ogg container with a different extension.  But
it's
>> been done as only DivX now for quite a while.  I think it's a little late
to
>> try and put Theora in there in people's mind.

>I'm not so sure.  *.avi files can have many different video codecs,
>can't they?  The actual codec isn't important when it comes to this issue.
>I don't see any reason at all why *.ogm couldn't be used for
>Theora-plus-Vorbis as well as DivX-plus-Vorbis and Xvid-plus-Vorbis
>(as it is today).

There have been a lot of messages lately, but I think I was trying to talk
about avoiding the .AVI problem.

With .avi, you have to play 'guess the codec'.  Figure out what codec the
avi container is wanting, and then try to hunt it up and hope that it's
still available.  That's why there are so many of the warez "codec packs"
for Windows.  They contain dozens of warez copies of codecs for AVI files
that you might run into.

With OGM, it's been DivX, so Theora would be competing with it in its own
container format for user recognition and understanding.  People might begin
thinking that Theora is just an open source version of DivX, like XVid.

I was thinking along the lines that if you are going to do a special video
extension, then you might as well make (encourage) it to be just Xiph
codecs.  Makes it a whole lot easier for users to find the required codec if
they don't already have it.  And OGM could be for third party codecs.  In
that case, they can play "Hunt the codec" like they normally do for AVI
files.

I think in that particular message (which started with a 'thinking out loud'
message), I was trying to come up with a way so that users wouldn't have to
do that with Theora.  Even though that wouldn't solve the other Audio vs.
Video subject.  (This was a sub-subject)


>> Yup.  It would be the best solution.
>>
>> Apps just get programmed for that extra extension.  And since there
aren't
>> any Theora video player or editing apps yet, it's really no big deal.

>No.  You had it right the first time -- it's _not_ about the applications.
>It's about the files, and the way human beings relate to them.

At that point, a lot of people had been going off and saying that you needed
all sorts of OS handlers written, and this requirement and that requirement,
etc.  I was saying that none of that was needed.  Just a matter of chosing a
video extension that the user could easily recognise, and that using it
would be just a matter of a few applications deciding to use it.  No OS
handlers etc. needed.


We are agreeing here.  It's just that particular message you replied to was
probably less than clear due to it being one of several sub-subjects going
on.


>But what we _don't_ need is for Xiph to get involved in this issue (at
>least not at this time).  This is between the users and the application
>developers.  A standard is going to emerge -- either *.ogm or *.ogv,

I think that only Xiph can suggest the official standard extension to use
for video.

Otherwise people are going to be making their own choices.  A standard might
end up being chosen, but it would take longer for it to get accepted than if
Xiph makes it an official recommendation.


>would be my guess.  When that standard finally settles down, then
>Xiph can advocate it, make the reference encoder generate it, and so on.

And take credit for it retroactively.