similar to: Re: Peer review draft for the new

On 02/10/2007, Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com> wrote: > Martin Leese wrote: > > 2. Following on from 1, a tool which inputs an > > Ogg containier with one or more streams, and > > outputs a new Ogg container with the same > > streams plus an Ogg Skeleton stream stuffed > > in front would be very helpful. The tool could > > also

On 02/10/2007, Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com> wrote: > Martin Leese wrote: > > 2. Following on from 1, a tool which inputs an > > Ogg containier with one or more streams, and > > outputs a new Ogg container with the same > > streams plus an Ogg Skeleton stream stuffed > > in front would be very helpful. The tool could > > also

" Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves " <justivo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/24/07, Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com> wrote: > > The point I > > wanted to bring up was the MAY ignore unrecognised stream > > types, which I understood to be a future proofing mechanism. > > Oh. > > There is a similar notice in the wiki, which I did not integrate in > the

" Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves " <justivo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/24/07, Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com> wrote: > > The point I > > wanted to bring up was the MAY ignore unrecognised stream > > types, which I understood to be a future proofing mechanism. > > Oh. > > There is a similar notice in the wiki, which I did not integrate in > the

Brendan Bolles wrote: > Hey everyone, according to Wikipedia's 4-year-old information, there is no > standard for putting metadata into an Ogg file. True. > That metadata must be > included in the codec. More generally, in a stream in the Ogg file. Codecs are streams, but so are things like Ogg Skeleton. Information about Metadata has been collected together in the Xiph Wiki

Oh, hey, I'm more or less on the final stages of drafting the registration proposal that will be submitted to the IETF. If you have comments, suggestions, fixes, anything, this is it. https://trac.xiph.org/browser/experimental/ivo/drafts/draft-xiph-rfc3534bis.txt -Ivo

Oh, hey, I'm more or less on the final stages of drafting the registration proposal that will be submitted to the IETF. If you have comments, suggestions, fixes, anything, this is it. https://trac.xiph.org/browser/experimental/ivo/drafts/draft-xiph-rfc3534bis.txt -Ivo

Hi Ian, CMML is still a draft, so we can change the addressing if required. You're correct, currently something like blah.cmml#fragment points to a clip (or temporal section) of the stream, but blah.cmml#t=12 points to a 12 seconds offset. (same for annodex, i.e. ogg files with skeleton track). For pointing to logical streams inside ogg, I'd really suggest you have a look at

Hi Ian, CMML is still a draft, so we can change the addressing if required. You're correct, currently something like blah.cmml#fragment points to a clip (or temporal section) of the stream, but blah.cmml#t=12 points to a 12 seconds offset. (same for annodex, i.e. ogg files with skeleton track). For pointing to logical streams inside ogg, I'd really suggest you have a look at

Ralph Giles wrote: > > A URI/URL scheme for referencing streams would be a generally useful > thing. Should we override the query mechanism like the time fragment > draft? "?oggserial=0x15323421" ? > This is roughly what was suggested the last time around. A possible refinement is to provide a mapping from identifiers to IDs so you could say "?oggid=myvideo".

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

Hi all, The IETF has a final draft of our RFC at ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/authors/rfc5334.txt (yes, it goes from 3534 to 5334 - funny!). If you have anything in need of change, speak up now. I have one question in particular: Ogg.k.ogg.k: is the kate codec parameter now down to 8 bytes? If so, it's ok, since I've already made that change. Cheers, Silvia.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Malone" <ibmalone@gmail.com> To: "ogg-dev" <ogg-dev@xiph.org> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:24 PM Subject: Re: [ogg-dev] oggfile, skeleton and vorbis tools >> This is something we might want to extend skeleton to support, i know >> we've talked about this kind of thing before. So that skeleton can

Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com> wrote: > It depends what your aim is. The mapping type > in the vorbis setup header is meant for > this[1],[2]. Of course a nonzero mapping type will > cause a lot of players to give up, but so will > including the XML stream. I believe this is how > is was intended multi-channel would be handled. Thanks for the response, and for the

I am transcoding mp3 to wave using ffmpeg I am then piping it to speexenc for speex encoding but the speex file size is 496 bytes after the command ends https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2010-March/212927.html https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2010-March/212949.html https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2010-March/212954.html what am I doing wrong? bellow is

Daniel, these are all good ideas and worth progressing. However, it may be better not to merge too many goals in one format (MPEG-7 did that and ended up as a big mess). So, I suggest to start by structuring the types of things you want - then finding out which parts belong where into existing formats such as vorbis comment, Skeleton and CMML, and only then start to develop a new format. For

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

----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Malone" <ibmalone@gmail.com> To: <ogg-dev@xiph.org> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 8:42 AM Subject: Re: [ogg-dev] oggfile, skeleton and vorbis tools > Re-reading Monty's email: when you talk about vorbis-only vorbisfile and > the concurrent vorbis stream case do you mean vorbisfile will need to be > able to choose?

On 2/28/07, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/28/07, Ralph Giles <giles@xiph.org> wrote: > > Well, there are todo pages at wiki.xiph.org, but I meant more in the > > community folklore sense. My point is a roadmap doesn't help much unless > > there are people committed to making things happen. That's been the > > problem with a

On 2/28/07, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/28/07, Ralph Giles <giles@xiph.org> wrote: > > Well, there are todo pages at wiki.xiph.org, but I meant more in the > > community folklore sense. My point is a roadmap doesn't help much unless > > there are people committed to making things happen. That's been the > > problem with a