[LINK] Ogg Vorbis and Theora removed from HTML5

[Alastair Rankine]

Kim Holburn wrote:
> On 2007/Dec/17, at 12:07 AM, Alastair Rankine wrote:
>
>> I support the intent behind this change. It should not be up to the 
>> HTML spec to recommend (and it was only a recommendation) any 
>> specific video codec, regardless of the merits (or otherwise) of any 
>> one of them.
>>
>> The HTML spec should be reasonably stable and not subject to the 
>> turbulence that exists around video compression technology and 
>> associated intellectual property issues. A change in technology or 
>> licensing could, for example, instantly render the Ogg recommendation 
>> obsolete (or at least a lot less clear-cut).
>
> The spec recommends particular image compression technologies and they 
> have not always been unencumbered and the same gotchas apply to them 
> too and yet where would we be without images on the www?  Same for 
> audio - hasn't bgsound been around for a while with the same issues.

OMG where would the web be today without <bgsound> !? :)

Seriously, I think the spec should also refrain from recommending 
formats for other types of media to be embedded in HTML. The HTML 4 spec 
authors apparently feel the same way; at least I can't find anywhere in 
the spec where they recommend one image format over another (the closest 
they come is to *list* some that are "widely supported"). Please 
enlighten me if I've overlooked it anywhere.

One of the mailing list participants (as per the link from Marghanita) 
made the point that none of the participants in the WG are experts in 
intellectual property issues. Would you really want to drag them into 
this discussion all over a single SHOULD clause?

I support the adoption of an interoperable standard for video formats 
(and container, and audio, and subtitles, and metadata, and ...) but the 
HTML spec isn't the place to do it.