similar to: Contrinued work with Multimedia Metadata Format (M3F)

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 movie recordings in mind. The old version focused on providing separate tools for each media type, were the new version

Hi list, On 2007-09-10 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) Above, Silvia sums up nicely what I used three days and a tone of emails to say. (Though she did not say that this format should replace Vorbis comments all together, which is

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,

Hi ogg-dev list, After discussing the [lack of] metadata standards on the irc://irc.freenode.net/#Vorbis channel yesterday I figured I had to contribute to this process. Attached is a sample XML formatted metadata sheet describing a song; and shows off other media type elements as well. How this is to be embedded in the OGG container is not my field. I have only spent a couple of hours

Hi ogg-dev list, I am not trying to ?get someone?. But I though this form would indeed prove successful in making my point. Here we go: I got accused of ?reinventing the wheel? for this little media description format of mine. Fare enough. But I wanted to show everyone why it is sometimes best to sometings that has been done before all over. See the attached document. It uses existing

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 organisations and persons involved in the production of the recording. See:

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. >

On Monday 10. September 2007 01:10:44 Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 9/10/07, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen@runbox.com> wrote: > > It is indeed necessary. I hope this format will be a huge leap in > > metadata descriptions for media content. Not only for music, but any > > media found in Oggs. > > You are thinking too small. Such standards

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. > >

On 7/23/13, Silvia Pfeiffer <silvia at silvia-pfeiffer.de> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:59 AM, Martin Leese >> ... >>>> Information about Metadata >>>> has been collected together in the Xiph Wiki >>>> at: >>>> https://wiki.xiph.org/Metadata >> Page updated. See what you think. > > M3F is also not used anywhere

Hi list, I have been trying to get the new file extension for Ogg FLAC (.oga) to work with Amarok. But it does not look to be possible due to limitations in the xine and gstreamer engines. Maybe the move to .oga was prematurely? I have done some testing with other players?including Banshee, Quod Libet, and others?but have not had any success with playing the .oga files. Only player I have

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

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 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 > > >

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

So wiki discussion on the new metadata format is ongoing. I'd like to move some things about a bit. MDMF is a discussion of the metadata XML format itself, Metadata gives some background an overview and a few old sample cases. I'm not sure how many people read the wiki talk page so I thought I'd ask here if there were any objections before doing it. What would most likely happen

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 -l 16 --lax -m -e -p): encode...ERROR > during encode of fsd24-01 > FAIL: ./test_streams.sh > ===================

On 12/04/2008, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo at gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/11/08, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > uuencode ^_^ > > > > Hmm... > > Yes! A Vorbis Comment tag called ART or ALBUMART with a Base64 string > would do the trick and it would not choke existing players. No, vorbiscomments are meant to be

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