Content deleted Content added
AFirefoxUser (talk | contribs) →Support: clarified the removal timeline |
|||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Adoption of multimedia formats for the Web}}
{{Multiple issues|
{{Update|date=January 2019}}
Line 4 ⟶ 5:
}}
{{HTML}}
The [[HTML5]] draft specification adds <code>video</code> and <code>audio</code> [[HTML element|elements]] for
==Motivation==
{{Original research 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>
Users affiliated with the free software movement claimed the following advantages:
Line 33 ⟶ 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 49 ⟶ 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 =
|title = Google Chrome after a year: Sporting a new stable release
|first = Anthony |last=Laforge
Line 78 ⟶ 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=[whatwg]
|date=21 March 2007
|access-date=2008-02-25
Line 100 ⟶ 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>
{{blockquote|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=[whatwg] 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>}}
Line 111 ⟶ 113:
==Adoption==
{{Update|section|date=October 2021}}
As of December
"[[WebRTC]] Audio Codec and Processing Requirements" Internet standard drafts, published in 2011–2013, 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 journal|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==
*[[
==References==
Line 131 ⟶ 133:
[[Category:World Wide Web Consortium standards]]
[[Category:XML-based standards]]
[[Category:Xiph.Org projects]]
| |||