I have been tidying up the VorbisComment page in the XiphWiki. The problem with it was that it was a mixture of proposals and discussion of those proposals. This made it difficult for implementers to see what to implement. The problem section is: http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/VorbisComment#New_ENCODER_field_name_proposal This is a mess, and all I could do was add attributions to the discussion. Will somebody who was involved in the discussion please tidy up this mess. I also moved a failed proposal over to the Talk page. Please check I didn't break anything. Many thanks, Martin -- Martin J Leese E-mail: martin.leese stanfordalumni.org Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/
2009/6/29 Martin Leese <martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org>:> I have been tidying up the VorbisComment > page in the XiphWiki. ?The problem with it was > that it was a mixture of proposals and > discussion of those proposals. ?This made it > difficult for implementers to see what to > implement.great! that page had grown quite a lot ...> The problem section is: > http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/VorbisComment#New_ENCODER_field_name_proposal > > This is a mess, and all I could do was add > attributions to the discussion. ?Will somebody > who was involved in the discussion please tidy > up this mess.I've sorted it into what seem to be three separate topics: ENCODER in general, inclusion of a URL, and ENCODED_BY. Also (in a separate commit) added some chatty rationale in response to "What is lacking from the vendor string present in the spec from the start? All libvorbis and encoder tunings I'm aware of have recorded the encoder version here": Rationale for not using the vendor string: * The vendor string is usually used to store the name and version of the underlying codec library * The idea of ENCODER is to store the name of the user-visible application, for example ffmpeg2theora. * It can be useful for debugging to store the name and version of the calling application. * The libvorbis API does not let applications override the vendor string. Conrad.
Conrad Parker <conrad at metadecks.org> wrote:> 2009/6/29 Martin Leese <martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org>: >> I have been tidying up the VorbisComment >> page in the XiphWiki....>> The problem section is: >> http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/VorbisComment#New_ENCODER_field_name_proposal...> I've sorted it ...The page contains one more glaring inconsistency which, I believe, will confuse implementers. Near the top under "Proposed field names", the page lists two external proposals for new field names.* ** Then lower down under "Attributing involved parties", it says NO PROPOSAL and points readers to the Multimedia Metadata Format (M3F) draft which uses XML.*** So, does Xiph approve of proposals for new field names or not? The page implies both yes and no. (For what it is worth, I see the need for both new field names and M3F.) Also, I have compared the suggested field names in the Vorbis I spec**** with those in the two external proposals.* ** I attach the result in an Excel spreadsheet (although I am not sure what the list server will do with an attachment). The two proposals use different field names for the same function, eg, SOURCEMEDIA and SOURCE MEDIUM. It might be beneficial to rationalise these and to bring the external proposals inside Xiph. I am happy to do more work on this, but need guidance from the Xiph community. Many thanks, Martin * http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/VorbisComment#Proposed_field_names ** http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/VorbisComment#Attributing_involved_parties *** http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/M3F **** http://xiph.org/vorbis/doc/v-comment.html -- Martin J Leese E-mail: martin.leese stanfordalumni.org Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: VorbisComment.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 16384 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/vorbis-dev/attachments/20090702/90f647f4/attachment.xls
xiphmont at xiph.org wrote:> In fact we have an official policy of neglect w.r.t. tags mainly > because two things keep happening over and over again: > > 1) Someone shows up with a 'MUST HAVE' list of about a hundred and > eighty tags and spends weeks bikeshedding on the lists and wasting > everyones' time .... Martin Leese <martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org> wrote:> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:30 AM, <xiphmont at xiph.org> wrote: >>> I am sane, but do not use VorbisComments >>> *at all*. I therefore cannot do an update >>> without guidance. >> >> Perfect! You're hired. Oh, you've already been working here for years? Good! > > I accept this mission.Mission accomplished. I have put the result in the XiphWiki, visit: http://wiki.xiph.org/Field_names I tried to upload the analysis Excel spreadsheet to the wiki, but uploads are disabled. I tried attaching it to this post, but this tipped the post over 40 kbytes and it then got stuck waiting for approval by a moderator. I will attach it to a following (minimal) post to try to squeeze it through. (Note that the spreadsheet will contains two sheets.) As requested, I kept the number of field names to less than 180. Regards, Martin -- Martin J Leese E-mail: martin.leese stanfordalumni.org Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/
See previous post -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FieldNames.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 39936 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/vorbis-dev/attachments/20090716/e2db9203/attachment-0001.xls
xiphmont at xiph.org
2009-Jul-16 19:19 UTC
[Vorbis-dev] Tidy up of XiphWiki VorbisComment page
> I tried to upload the analysis Excel > spreadsheet to the wiki, but uploads are > disabled. ?I tried attaching it to this post, but > this tipped the post over 40 kbytes and it then > got stuck waiting for approval by a moderator.Oh, oops, I am the laziest moderator ever, but I can go poke it.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:19 PM, <xiphmont at xiph.org> wrote:>> I tried to upload the analysis Excel >> spreadsheet to the wiki, but uploads are >> disabled. I tried attaching it to this post, but >> this tipped the post over 40 kbytes and it then >> got stuck waiting for approval by a moderator. > > Oh, oops, I am the laziest moderator ever, but I can go poke it.Many thanks. I also stuffed it on my website at: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/Personal/FieldNames.xls Would it be a good idea to upload it to the XiphWiki? If so, somebody who has the relevant permissions will have to do it. Regards, Martin -- Martin J Leese E-mail: martin.leese stanfordalumni.org Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/