To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
So you'd be OK with an HTML standard that can't be implemented (legally) in its entirety by an open source project? If HTML5 were to specify MPEG family codecs, that's exactly what would happen. And that's why the W3C decided to specify NO preferred codecs if they couldn't get the Ogg family approved. Unlike ISO, which is completely beholden to corporate interests and has no problem allowing standards that are licensed under so-called RAND terms (nominally Reasonable and Non-discriminatory, but in actuality Unreasonable and VERY Discriminatory), the W3C believes in OPEN standards: anyone can implement them using whatever source model they choose. Hats off to the W3C for not compromising its principles!
Are you saying that MPEG standards are acceptable? Because, well, AAC is defined by both MPEG-2 part 7 and MPEG-4 part 3 and by ISO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_Part_3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-2#ISO.2FIEC_13818
Besides it is possible to do everything royalty-free. FAAC en FAAD (open source encoder and decoder) didn't pay a single € to anyone.







Member since:
2005-07-06
You are wrong:
http://www.vialicensing.com/Licensing/AAC_FAQ.cfm?faq=1#1
HE-AAC is also included: http://www.vialicensing.com/Licensing/AAC_FAQ.cfm?faq=3#3
Btw not that I would mind if Vorbis became part of the specs... Au contraire. I just think AAC would be a better choice.
Edited 2009-07-02 20:15 UTC