>Kenneth Arnold wrote: >For all that verbosity, my proposition is a simple >question: what is the mimimum set of changes needed to make a killer >editing format out of Ogg, and are those modifications small enough >that streaming-Ogg and editing-Ogg can be unified such that one is >just a special case of another? I think this is an important concern >that is best addressed early if Ogg is to take over the world, i.e. if >adding editing capabilities requires a minor change to the bitstream >format for the streaming case (which ideally would be a simple result >of an editor splicing parts together on the fly), it's better to do it >now while we're still not locked into a bitstream (neither RC1 or RC2 >will play anything but degenerate streams anyway AFAIK).Why wouldn't you use AAF? http://www.aafassociation.org/index.html From what little I understand, Ogg was designed with the purpose of acting as a transport stream rather than an editing format. Are there reasons not to adopt AAF? It appears (I've never used it personally) to have a very robust handling of metadata, tagging info and media, ideal for editing situations. -Reuben --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Looked through the license and it seems that it is heavily patented. So screw it! :-p // Wigren> >Kenneth Arnold wrote: > >For all that verbosity, my proposition is a simple > >question: what is the mimimum set of changes needed tomake a killer> >editing format out of Ogg, and are those modificationssmall enough> >that streaming-Ogg and editing-Ogg can be unified suchthat one is> >just a special case of another? I think this is animportant concern> >that is best addressed early if Ogg is to take over theworld, i.e. if> >adding editing capabilities requires a minor change tothe bitstream> >format for the streaming case (which ideally would be asimple result> >of an editor splicing parts together on the fly), it'sbetter to do it> >now while we're still not locked into a bitstream(neither RC1 or RC2> >will play anything but degenerate streams anyway AFAIK). > > Why wouldn't you use AAF?http://www.aafassociation.org/index.html> From what little I understand, Ogg was designed with thepurpose of acting> as a transport stream rather than an editing format. Arethere reasons not> to adopt AAF? It appears (I've never used it personally)to have a very> robust handling of metadata, tagging info and media,ideal for editing> situations. > > -Reuben > > > > --- >8 ---- > List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ > Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ > To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request@xiph.org'> containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. Nosubject is needed.> Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will beignored/filtered.>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
>Per Wigren wrote: >Looked through the license and it seems that it is heavily >patented. So screw it! :-p"...The AAF SDK is licensed under a perpetual, royalty-free license. Users are allowed to download source code, make derivative works, include these works in their products and charge for these works." So how is this much different than a BSD license? (BTW: I know very little about licenses... :) --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.