similar to: Fwd: Re: Support .cda as input files

On 2007-09-13, Ivo wrote: > On 9/13/07, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > > I know that. However when you put an audio CD in a computer you will > > see them as files with the .cda extension. Supporting this 'format' > > would make encoding simpler as users would not need to 'rip' to a > > format, but could drag and

On 2007-09-13, Ivo wrote: > On 9/13/07, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > > I know that. However when you put an audio CD in a computer you will > > see them as files with the .cda extension. Supporting this 'format' > > would make encoding simpler as users would not need to 'rip' to a > > format, but could drag and

does anybody know why dvd use files for audio and video but audio cd's not? What could be the reason for this? e.g. they could make a file for each track and just put them on an audio cd and make cd players compatible with this format. So for me it has always been a mystery why audio cd's work this way. does anybody knows if super audio cd's still work the same as normal ones?

On 2007-09-13, Brian wrote: > On Sep 13, 2007, at 12:08, Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: >> I would really like to see support for .cda as input files. The cda >> format >> is the one used on regular audio CDs. >> >> Support for this format would make it even easier to encode to FLAC >> from CDs > > You are mistaken, Daniel. Regular audio CDs do not use

Hi list, I would really like to see support for .cda as input files. The cda format is the one used on regular audio CDs. Support for this format would make it even easier to encode to FLAC from CDs -- Daniel Aleksandersen

On 19/09/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 19. September 2007 19:02:06 Ian Malone wrote: > > Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > > > Attached is a much improved version of yesterday's draft. Introducing > > > the audio:collection:artwork element to deal with album cover graphics > > > and such. > >

Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: ... > Since the URI attribute can describe locations (URLs), the format could work > as a RDF document; being an external resource describing external content. > But of course the metadata would be in the Ogg stream-container-thingy > (...somehow. help. input?) in the case of the Ogg format. As this would be XML, I

On 10/09/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > On Monday 10. September 2007 23:39:50 Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > > 2) we need a XML annotation format for audio - in particular for music > > - that is more structured than vorbiscomment (and this probably > > applies to video, too) > > It would have to apply to any kind of media. >

Hi again Ivo and the Xiph ogg-dev emailing list, This email is meant to present two blockers for continued development of the XML based Multimedia Metadata Format (M3F) (MDMF page in the wiki). This format is intended to replace comments as a way of including descriptions of metadata contained in the Ogg container format. For instance title, production year, actors, producers, and so on for

On Thursday 20. September 2007 14:54:06 Ian Malone wrote: > On 19/09/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 19. September 2007 19:02:06 Ian Malone wrote: > > > Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > > > > Attached is a much improved version of yesterday's draft. > > > > Introducing the

On Tuesday 18. September 2007 14:32:45 Ian Malone wrote: > On 11/09/2007, Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 11/09/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > > > On Tuesday 11. September 2007 01:34:35 Ian Malone wrote: > > > > I'd be interested which ones. DC is a bit nebulous, but that gives > > >

On 2007-09-15, Josh wrote: > --- Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > > Hi list, > > > > I am trying to compile and install flac 1.2. I $ ./configure(d) and $ > > > > make(d) without any errors or warnings. However I get the following > > error > > > > when $ make check(ing): > > > Testing 24-bit

Hi again list, I have given the matter of supporting .cda as input format some more thought. What I wanted was an easier way to do drag 'n' drop music files from CDs onto the local system and then have those files encoded with FLAC. As of now most operating systems displays files on CDs as .cda. (Which has later been clarified not to even be a format.) I think that what I actually

--- Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > Hi list, > > I am trying to compile and install flac 1.2. I $ ./configure(d) and $ > > make(d) without any errors or warnings. However I get the following > error > when $ make check(ing): > > > Testing 24-bit full-scale deflection streams... > > fsd24-01 (--channels=1 --bps=24 -0

On 9/18/07, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > Maybe the move to .oga was prematurely? No, it wasn't premature. We have been having this discussion since last year. We are contacting the projects that deal, for instance, with Ogg FLAC, we're gong to submit the memo with the new file extensions/media types to the IETF soon, and some of us are even

On 14/09/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > The biggest problem with Vorbis comments are too loose specifications and > too little standardisation. > > Another problem is attribution of involved parties. Currently only the > ARTIST field name is supported in software. More standardised field names > need to be worked out for

On 04/12/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > Hi ogg-dev list, > > I have improved the format formally known as Media Description and > Metadata (MDMF) for the Ogg Container Format. > > Please have a look at the M3F page in the wiki http://wiki.xiph.org/M3F > > The format have been simplified and designed primarily with audio and

Daniel, nobody has accused you of reinventing the wheel. You give up too easily. If you want to develop a standard, it takes a lot of discussion and input - and it takes diplomacy. Attacking people and attacking the community will not be helpful. You have asked for feedback - feedback has been given. Now it's time to think and digest. I for one have been motivated by the topic of discussion,

On 11/09/2007, Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/09/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > > On Tuesday 11. September 2007 01:34:35 Ian Malone wrote: > > > I'd be interested which ones. DC is a bit nebulous, but that gives > > > you tremendous freedom too. Atom on the other hand has a very > > >

On 11/09/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+xiphlists@runbox.com> wrote: > On Tuesday 11. September 2007 01:34:35 Ian Malone wrote: > > Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > > > By the way, I have bee discussing Dublin Core ('DC') with the > > > developers of the Atom 1.0 specification. It seams the reason they > > > created atom:rights instead of