On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 9:03 PM, ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com <ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com> wrote:>>> Just one small question, 10.3: "In particular, .ogg is used for Ogg >>> files that contain only a Vorbis bitstream, while .spx is used for Ogg >>> files that contain only a Speex bitstream." >>> >>> Should that be a "Vorbis I" bitstream, or is it intentionally left open? >> >> Technically it is a Vorbis I bitstream, but I think we should leave >> that flexible. Any other opinions? > > I read the "Vorbis I" definition to be a (physical) stream composed of a single > (logical) Vorbis stream, so I'd say the wording implies it is Vorbis > I.Actually, thinking back, that was exactly what we implied: a Vorbis I stream is a Ogg file that contains only a Vorbis bitstream. Ian: is that good enough for you? Cheers, Silvia.
2008/8/15 Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com>:> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 9:03 PM, ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com > <ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com> wrote: >>>> Just one small question, 10.3: "In particular, .ogg is used for Ogg >>>> files that contain only a Vorbis bitstream, while .spx is used for Ogg >>>> files that contain only a Speex bitstream." >>>> >>>> Should that be a "Vorbis I" bitstream, or is it intentionally left open? >>> >>> Technically it is a Vorbis I bitstream, but I think we should leave >>> that flexible. Any other opinions? >> >> I read the "Vorbis I" definition to be a (physical) stream composed of a single >> (logical) Vorbis stream, so I'd say the wording implies it is Vorbis >> I. > > Actually, thinking back, that was exactly what we implied: a Vorbis I > stream is a Ogg file that contains only a Vorbis bitstream. Ian: is > that good enough for you? >Ouch, sorry for the delay. To be clear, I was thinking in terms of Vorbis version; those bits in the Vorbis I spec which read like, "Vorbis I specifies only a channel mapping type 0". Just wanted to check whether it was intentional to leave it open or not. -- imalone
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Ian Malone <ibmalone at gmail.com> wrote:> 2008/8/15 Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com>: >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 9:03 PM, ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com >> <ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>> Just one small question, 10.3: "In particular, .ogg is used for Ogg >>>>> files that contain only a Vorbis bitstream, while .spx is used for Ogg >>>>> files that contain only a Speex bitstream." >>>>> >>>>> Should that be a "Vorbis I" bitstream, or is it intentionally left open? >>>> >>>> Technically it is a Vorbis I bitstream, but I think we should leave >>>> that flexible. Any other opinions? >>> >>> I read the "Vorbis I" definition to be a (physical) stream composed of a single >>> (logical) Vorbis stream, so I'd say the wording implies it is Vorbis >>> I. >> >> Actually, thinking back, that was exactly what we implied: a Vorbis I >> stream is a Ogg file that contains only a Vorbis bitstream. Ian: is >> that good enough for you? >> > > Ouch, sorry for the delay. To be clear, I was thinking in terms of > Vorbis version; those bits in the Vorbis I spec which read like, > "Vorbis I specifies only a channel mapping type 0". Just wanted to > check whether it was intentional to leave it open or not.It was not fully thought through, discussed, and decided consciously to leave it open, if that's what you mean by "intentional". But we can make that decision now and decide to write "Vorbis I" more specifically, or leave it open. What would you suggest? Cheers, Silvia.