Hi, The standards for audio and video to be used by the Wikimedia projects (like Wikipedia) are Ogg Vorbis and Ogg Theora. The use of Ogg Vorbis files is growing fast. For now the use of video is still very limited. The problem is that an audio and an video file looks the same because of the same file extension. This is very annoying because you do not know what for file it is when you look at it. When you have files on your computer or cd-roms you know your stuff and know what is what. But in a community like the the Wikimedia projects that uses a wiki many users are working whit the files and the fact that a audio file looks the same as a video file it is confusing. Is there a recommended other extension that can be used instead of "ogg"? Like you can have a flac-file whit the extension "flac" but also "ogg"? FYI here is the current selection of video in Ogg Theora; http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Video Greetings, Walter Vermeir [[w:nl:gebruiker:walter]]
Walter Vermeir
2005-May-08 03:06 UTC
[Theora] Re: Other extension for Ogg Theora then "ogg"
Adam D. Moss schreef:> One extension I've seen used in a few places for ogg-wrapped > movies and have now adopted myself, is "ogm" for theora > 'OGgMovie' I presume).The problem whit that one is that it is usesd for video that is in mpeg whit Ogg Vorbis audio. So it is not Theroa.
This is one of those contentious issues. In fact a .flac file, should only have flac framing in it... no ogg at all... there's actually 3 different types of flac files... "native flac", which has nothing to do with ogg, "ogg flac classic", the original encapsulation of flac into ogg, and "Oggflac 1.0" which is a new encapsulation of flac in ogg. Being in the windows world, i made my directshow filters also accept .oga and .ogv (ie to specify audio or video), since many things in windows are based on file extensions... one notable thing that's relevant is WMP's media library, to classify a file as going in the audio or video section requires a file extension to decide. But note... these are not accepted extensions for these files... nor is this recommended by xiph. If you look back in the mailing list and meeting minutes, i'm sure you'll find many long discussions of such things. on one side the file extension people, on the other the "file magic" people. Zen. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Vermeir" <walter.temp2005@sol3.info> To: <theora@xiph.org> Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 4:50 PM Subject: [Theora] Other extension for Ogg Theora then "ogg"> Hi, > > The standards for audio and video to be used by the Wikimedia projects > (like Wikipedia) are Ogg Vorbis and Ogg Theora. > > The use of Ogg Vorbis files is growing fast. For now the use of video is > still very limited. > > The problem is that an audio and an video file looks the same because of > the same file extension. This is very annoying because you do not know > what for file it is when you look at it. When you have files on your > computer or cd-roms you know your stuff and know what is what. But in a > community like the the Wikimedia projects that uses a wiki many users > are working whit the files and the fact that a audio file looks the same > as a video file it is confusing. > > Is there a recommended other extension that can be used instead of > "ogg"? Like you can have a flac-file whit the extension "flac" but also > "ogg"? > > FYI here is the current selection of video in Ogg Theora; > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Video > > Greetings, > Walter Vermeir > > [[w:nl:gebruiker:walter]] > > _______________________________________________ > Theora mailing list > Theora@xiph.org > http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/theora > > >
On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Walter Vermeir wrote:> Is there a recommended other extension that can be used instead of > "ogg"? Like you can have a flac-file whit the extension "flac" but also > "ogg"?Hi Walter, I think it is a confusion created originally by mp3 which is both an encoding and a format. Then the ogg container format name for some time was used exclusively for vorbis audio files which led people to a belief that .ogg means audio when it does not. A vorbis player has even got name "ogg123" which is very confusing for people not aware of the internals... On the other side .ogg is about the same as .avi - it can contain a lot of things, not necessarily theora or just sound or just video. So imho there is nothing wrong with .ogg naming, though the contents type guess is impossible. As bad as with .avi where you can not guess by the name which of the myriads of video codecs has been used. You might want to add other parts into the name which tell about the contents like Xyz-movie-16:9-720x480-25fps-theora_quality_5.5-vorbis_quality_2.ogg or just Xyz.theora.vorbis.ogg or may be even Xyz.xdiv.pcm.ogg when xdiv-related patents wear out? or something else.> FYI here is the current selection of video in Ogg Theora; > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:VideoThat's exciting to see. Regards, -- Ivan
> Look at this page; > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Video > > How to I know that is video and not audio?Well the URL should give you a hint right? "Category:Video"... Most people don't even know what an extention is. They'll just click on the Category:Video link and then click on one of the shiny icon to get their video, as expected.>The > MediaWiki software gives > it an music icon. Gnome also.Well, that's a serious bug then cause they're not audio!> If free open source > software not even > can see the difference between audio and video how > can an average user > see it?As you can see on that picture, Konqueror does see the difference because it does things the right way. http://p80.free.fr/theoravorbis.png AYCS, icons are different and when I click on my theora file it fires Kaffeine (a KDE video player) and when I click on my vorbis it enqueues it Amarok (a KDE audio player) I think Gnome is going to use http://www.gnome.org/projects/beagle/ more and more which use content search rather than file extension and I heard longhorn was going to have something like this too :). So instead of focusing on old windows98 way to handle files we should rather work for the future ;) And by the time Longhorn comes out I guess theora will be 1.0 rock stable and full featured, right Ralph? :) Pat __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
--- Ole Tange <ole@tange.dk> wrote:> Doing a simple Google search gives: > > ogg: 3,760,000 hits. Most links on first result page > is about Ogg/Vorbis > ogm: 1,090,000 hits. Several links on first result > page is about Ogg > oga: 411,000 hits. No links on first result page is > about Ogg > ogv: 106,000 hits. No links on first result page is > about OggDon't forget that Ogg Theora hasn't been released yet officially as stable and there are other nice free alternative such as xvid (although patented by mpeg) so don't expect people to ruch on downloading an alpha video codec and start encoding like mad. Theora isn't FireFox, yet ;) Pat __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
--- Alen Ladavac <alenl-ml@croteam.com> wrote:> So, until Longhorn starts driving on the right side > (what is not going to > come for at least one more year, mind you! and even > then,Sorry but theora hasn't been released either yet. I guess longhorn will be released a few months after theora. And by the time people start using Theora on their website or so I guess longhorn will be there already.> users are not > going to just jump over like crazy - ms software > costs money, remember?),they might cost money but nobody pay for them. People get windows with their computer. If you already have one at home, you'll just need to get a cracked copy for free like slashdotters do ;) or install linux like me, people usually don't do video encoding at work so that doesn't really matter.> we need a solution. Whoever is uninterested in it > doesn't have to participate. > But don't be counter productive, please....I don't think calling theora devs counterproductive is really productive neither... By the way, if you want to give it a different extension, go for it. Windows users won't get confused if theora files have different extensions as windows hides extensions by default so they won't notice the difference, right? Cheers Pat __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
From: "pat cito" <oggtheora@yahoo.com>> --- Borphee <borphee@cebridge.net> wrote: >> I don't care if people use Linux. > And you expect us to care about people using windows > :pEvery developer etc. should care about the 95% dominant OS. It doesn't matter whether you like windows or not. It's the dominant OS by a wide, wide margin. Acceptance of reality doesn't mean you have to like it. Denial of reality doesn't make it true. Even Apple recognises that and provides iTunes and Quicktime, etc. to Windows users. Do you really think the iTunes store (and program), and the ipod, would be so prevalent without Windows support?>> I use windows >> because the programs I want >> to run don't under Linux.> You mean the latest MSN messenger with flashy shiny > background and stuff? You'll n-e-v-e-r going to find > the exact same app on linux. It's up to you man.I didn't say those apps. However, those are reasonable examples. If you use and depend on programs that aren't available on a different OS, then you aren't going to switch. But I do have a number that don't work right and some that don't work at all. Plus there's still hardware driver issues, etc.>> As I've told others, I >> intently hope this will be >> my last Microsoft OS, and that by the time I'm ready >> to upgrade, the Linux >> world will have progressed enough for me to make the >> switch.> that sounds like trolling to me. "linux sucks, i hopeThen you need to get your ears cleaned out. I do play with various Linux versions in vmware. So far, in my opinion, it doesn't have the usability that Windows does. It definetly does not have the hardware support yet. Nor the native program support. Nor the game support. And certainly not the retail program support. In most computer stores, you'd be hard pressed to find a copy of the Linux OS, let alone any programs for it. Linux is not ready for me. Maybe in a couple years, when I am finally forced to upgrade, Linux will have progessed far enough for me to make the switch.> it will catch up one day on super dooper windows" and > you're telling us you don't want to start a > linuxVsWindows war?If I wanted to do an OS war, I could do it a heck of a lot better than that. As I said above... if that sounded like a OS troll, then you need to get your ears cleaned out.>> But by the same point, since I don't use Linux, I >> don't care what does or >> does not happen on it. It has a very small segment >> of the world market, so >> most people don't care and aren't going to care.> Sounds like trolling again. "Nobody cares about linux > as nobody uses it...". Thank you very much again.That's just plain stupid. Obviously the developers here are Linux users and do care about linux. But there's no reason for a *user* of the dominant OS to be overly concerned about what 5% of the world market (Mac & OS together) are doing. You seem to be very good at trying to provoke arguments. Trying to read things that were not said. Some people are definetly not happy when anybody says something that isn't negative about Microsoft or Windows.
On Tue, 10 May 2005 14:35:51 -0500 "Borphee" <borphee@cebridge.net> wrote:> Do you really think the iTunes store (and program), and the > ipod, would be so prevalent without Windows support?Well, to point a fact, iPod certainly was quite popular long before it got Windows support.