Ogg formats in HTML5: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:51, 19 July 2022

Latest revision as of 22:18, 14 August 2025

(17 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Adoption of multimedia formats for the Web}}

{{HTML}}{{Outdated|date=January 2019}}{{Bias|date=January 2018}}

{{Multiple issues|

The [[HTML5]] draft specification adds <code>video</code> and <code>audio</code> [[HTML element|elements]] for '''embedding video and audio in HTML documents'''. The specification had formerly recommended support for playback of '''[[Theora]] video and [[Vorbis]] audio encapsulated in [[Ogg]] [[Container format (digital)|containers]]''' to provide for easier distribution of audio and video over the internet by using [[open standard]]s, but the recommendation was soon after dropped.

{{Update|date=January 2019}}

{{Unbalanced|date=January 2018}}

}}

{{HTML}}

The [[HTML5]] draft specification adds <code>video</code> and <code>audio</code> [[HTML element|elements]] for '''embedding video and audio in HTML documents'''. The specification had formerly recommended support for playback of '''[[Theora]] video and [[Vorbis]] audio encapsulated in [[Ogg]] [[Container format (digital)|containers]]''' to provide for easier distribution of audio and video over the internet by using [[open standard]]s, but the recommendation was soon after dropped.

==Motivation==

{{SectionOriginal ORresearch section|date=January 2012}}

Because some visitors and publishers choose not to take part in the use of [[proprietary software]], web content has been made available through [[open standard]]s in order to reach these users. As multimedia is already mainstream on the web through proprietary data formats (such as [[Windows Media Video]] and [[MPEG-4 Part 14|MP4]]) and browser [[Plug-in (computing)|plugin]]s (such as [[Adobe Flash Player]]), developers{{Who|date=January 2018}} had hoped Theora and Vorbis would become part of the HTML5 specification.<ref>{{cite web | title = Ogg Theora, H.264 and the HTML 5 Browser Squabble | date = 6 July 2009 | author = RoughlyDrafted Magazine | publisher = RoughlyDrafted Magazine | url = http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/07/06/ogg-theora-h-264-and-the-html-5-browser-squabble/ | access-date = 14 February 2010 | archive-date = 3 December 2010 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20101203202243/http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/07/06/ogg-theora-h-264-and-the-html-5-browser-squabble/ | url-status = dead }}</ref>

| title = Ogg Theora, H.264 and the HTML 5 Browser Squabble | date = 6 July 2009

| author = RoughlyDrafted Magazine | publisher = RoughlyDrafted Magazine

| url = http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/07/06/ogg-theora-h-264-and-the-html-5-browser-squabble/ | access-date = 14 February 2010

}}</ref>

Users affiliated with the free software movement claimed the following advantages:

* The potential for universal adoption of Theora and Vorbis, no matter the computer or the user, would ease "codec hell" by eliminating an unnecessary amount of codecs required to view and publish videos to a select few.{{factcitation needed|date=January 2012}}

* Browser plugins needed to accommodate the many different codecs would then become a thing of the past:

** Browsers could handle the playback of Theora and Vorbis and allow the user to customize the manner in which that was done.

** Bugs and exploits in obsolete versions of those plugins would affect the user less, as they are phased out; the loss of multiple attack vectors would happen once browser plugins were ultimately removed.{{factcitation needed|date=January 2012}}

** The HTML5-conformant player, not having to be coded for compatibility with different browsers, could make bugs and exploits easier to find during browser development, and any exploits found would only be able to target that one browser.{{clarifymeclarify|date=January 2012}}

* [[Free software]] encoders would compete with rival proprietary encoders, increasing encoder quality through competition.{{factcitation needed|date=January 2012}}

* Embedding of multimedia by the use of clear and straightforward <code>video</code> and <code>audio</code> elements would require less effort than mastering the [[HTML element#Images and objects|<code>object</code>]] element or learning [[ActionScript]] as required by Adobe Flash.{{factcitation needed|date=January 2012}}

[[Chief technical officer|CTO]] at [[Opera Software]], [[Håkon Wium Lie]] explained in a Google tech talk entitled "The <video> element" the proposal of Theora as the video format for HTML5:<ref>{{cite web |title=Håkon Wium Lie on the video element in HTML 5 |url=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5545573096553082541&ei=LV6hSaz0JpbA2AKh4OyPDg&hl=un |access-date=2009-02-22 |publisher=Google Video |date=2007-03-29}}</ref>

{{quoteblockquote|I believe very strongly, that we need to agree on some kind of baseline video format if [the video element] is going to succeed. [...] We want a freely implementable open standard to hold the content we put out. That's why we developed the [[Portable Network Graphics|PNG]] image format. [...] PNG [...] came late to the party. Therefore I think it's important that from the beginning we think about this.}}

After the presentation, Lie was asked whether [[Opera (browser)|Opera]] will support other formats than Ogg:

{{quoteblockquote|My opinion is that browsers shouldn't support other codecs, at least not in the beginning, until we have established a baseline format. [...] We don't want to contaminate <video> with other formats.}}

==Support==

Line 29 ⟶ 30:

[[Opera Software]] and [[Mozilla Foundation|Mozilla]] have been advocates for including the Ogg formats into the HTML standard.<ref>{{cite web

|url=http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140408-pg,1/article.html

|title=Mozilla, Opera Want to Make Video on the Web Easier
|publisher=PC World
|date=2007-12-07

|access-date=2009-06-30

|archive-date=2008-04-24

|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080424090201/http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140408-pg,1/article.html

|url-status=dead

}}</ref>

Support has been available in experimental builds of [[Opera (browser)|Opera]] 9.5 since 2007,<ref>{{cite web

Line 45 ⟶ 51:

|url = http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.0/

|access-date = 2009-10-31}}</ref>), released on June 30, 2009, was the first non-experimental layout engine to support Ogg formats. [[Google Chrome]] included support in their 3.0 release (September 2009),<ref>{{cite web

|url = httphttps://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-chrome-after-year-sporting-new.html

|title = Google Chrome after a year: Sporting a new stable release

|first = Anthony |last=Laforge

Line 60 ⟶ 66:

Microsoft began work in October 2017 on implementing support for Ogg, Vorbis, and Theora in Windows 10 and [[Microsoft Edge]].<ref name="firewalldvsufw">{{cite web|title=Microsoft adding Ogg, Theora, and Vorbis open media formats to Windows 10|url= https://www.slightfuture.com/technote/ufw-vs-firewalld|website=Ctrl blog|date= 9 February 2016|access-date=10 October 2017}}</ref>

In October 2023, Google announced their plans to deprecate and remove support for the Theora video codec starting with experiments reducing Theora support in Chrome 120 and a full removal in Chrome 123, Google states that the reason for the removal is due to low use and security risks associated with the codec.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Intent to Ship: Deprecate and remove Theora support. |url=https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/qqDdLkeyk7Y/m/ajHePzglAwAJ |access-date=2023-10-24 |website=groups.google.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Deprecate and remove Theora support. - Chrome Platform Status |url=https://chromestatus.com/feature/5158654475239424 |access-date=2023-10-24 |website=chromestatus.com}}</ref>

==Opposition==

Line 72 ⟶ 80:

}}</ref> states that "a W3C-led standardization of a 'free' codec, or the active endorsement of proprietary technology such as Ogg [...] by W3C, is, in our opinion, not helpful". [[Xiph.org]]'s codecs, while licensed under a [[BSD licenses#BSD-style licenses|BSD-style]] [[permissive free software license]], implement a standard controlled by Xiph.org themselves, rather than a multi-vendor community such as MPEG. [[Apple Inc.]], a member of the [[MPEG LA]], has also opposed the inclusion of Ogg formats in the HTML standard on the grounds that [[H.264]] performs better and is already more widely supported, citing patents on their codec's efficiency and the lack of precedents of "Placing requirements on format support", even at the "SHOULD" level, in HTML specifications.<ref name="apple-ogg">{{cite mailing list

|url=http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/010392.html

|title=&#91;whatwg&#93; Codecs (was Re: Apple Proposal for Timed Media Elements)

|date=21 March 2007

|access-date=2008-02-25

Line 94 ⟶ 102:

|url-status = dead

|df = dmy-all

}}</ref> replacing the reference to Theora and Vorbis with a placeholder:<ref>{{cite web |url=http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=1142&to=1143 |title=(X)HTML5 Tracking |publisher=[[HTML5]].org |access-date=2009-06-23 |archive-date=2022-06-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220615153408/http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=1142 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

{{quoteblockquote|It would be helpful for interoperability if all browsers could support the same codecs. However, there are no known codecs that satisfy all the current players: we need a codec that is known to not require per-unit or per-distributor licensing, that is compatible with the open source development model, that is of sufficient quality as to be usable, and that is not an additional submarine patent risk for large companies. This is an ongoing issue and this section will be updated once more information is available.<ref>{{cite mailing list |url=http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-December/013152.html |title=&#91;whatwg&#93; Removal of Ogg is *preposterous* |publisher=Lists.whatwg.org |date=11 December 2007 |access-date=2009-08-25 |mailing-list=[[WHATWG]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080821163038/http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-December/013152.html |archive-date=2008-08-21 |url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

The removal of the Ogg formats from the specification made it completely file format neutral, like previous versions of HTML. The decision was criticized by a number of [[Web developer]]s. A follow-up discussion also occurred on the W3C questions and answers blog.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/12/when_will_html_5_support_soone.html |title=When will HTML 5 support &lt;video&gt;? Sooner if you help |last=Connolly |first=Dan |date=December 18, 2007 |publisher=[[W3C]] |access-date=2009-06-23}}</ref>

Line 105 ⟶ 113:

==Adoption==

{{Update|section|date=October 2021}}

As of December 31, 2020, Adobe Flash Player has stopped receiving support from Adobe,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Adobe Flash Player End of Life |url=https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/end-of-life.html |access-date=2023-01-28 |website=www.adobe.com |language=en-US}}</ref> with [[HTML video]] being one of the main technologies replacing it.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Team |first=Adobe Communications |title=Flash & the Future of Interactive Content |url=https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2017/07/25/adobe-flash-update |access-date=2023-01-28 |website=Adobe Blog}}</ref>

{{As of|2010|May}}, HTML5 video is not currently as widespread as Flash videos, though of recent rollouts of experimental HTML5-based video players on websites, DailyMotion is so far the only one to use Ogg Theora and Vorbis formats,<ref>{{cite web |title=Watch Video…without Flash |publisher=Dailymotion |date=2009-05-27 |url=http://blog.dailymotion.com/index.php/2009/05/27/watch-videowithout-flash/ |access-date=2010-05-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100822205946/http://blog.dailymotion.com/index.php/2009/05/27/watch-videowithout-flash/ |archive-date=2010-08-22 |url-status=dead }}</ref> which suggests an increasing early interest in adopting HTML5 video.

"[[WebRTC]] Audio Codec and Processing Requirements" Internet standard drafts, published in 2011-20132011–2013, require free formats, including [[Opus (audio codec)|Opus]], which was developed, among others, by programmers associated with [[Xiph.Org Foundation]] (the maintainer of [[Ogg]]).<ref>{{Cite documentjournal|url=http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-03|title = WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing Requirements|last1 = Valin|first1 = Jean-Marc|last2 = Bran|first2 = Cary| newspaper=Ietf Datatracker | date=15 October 2013 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://wiki.xiph.org/OpusFAQ | title=OpusFAQ - XiphWiki }}</ref><!-- does WebRTC use Opus in Ogg? -->

==See also==

*[[HTML5HTML video]]

==References==

Line 125 ⟶ 133:

[[Category:World Wide Web Consortium standards]]

[[Category:XML-based standards]]

[[Category:Xiph.Org projects]]