Comments on: Impasse on HTML 5 video http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/impasse-on-html-5-video/ Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:32:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: DRAFT Video, Video – More from the HTML5 universe at STC AccessAbility SIG http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/impasse-on-html-5-video/comment-page-1/#comment-650202 DRAFT Video, Video – More from the HTML5 universe at STC AccessAbility SIG Sat, 12 Dec 2009 17:04:39 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1776#comment-650202 [...] You’d like a – uh – video – to explain all this. Here is a demonstration of video accessibility. (This was a submission to the W4A 2009 Web accessibility conference.) In the video, we explain the current status of video accessibility on the Web and means forward for HTML5. We propose a solution for associating textual captions with video and explain it on the example of Ogg Kate, SRT and DFXP. We then explain further challenges such as Sign Language, Audio Annotations, and more general types of time-aligned text, e.g. Karaoke, music lyrics, ticker-text, transcripts, or annotations with hyperlinks.) Here’s another short video about connecting the video of HTML5 to the Web. Another video about HTML5 and video: Impass on HTML5 and video [...] [...] You’d like a – uh – video – to explain all this. Here is a demonstration of video accessibility. (This was a submission to the W4A 2009 Web accessibility conference.) In the video, we explain the current status of video accessibility on the Web and means forward for HTML5. We propose a solution for associating textual captions with video and explain it on the example of Ogg Kate, SRT and DFXP. We then explain further challenges such as Sign Language, Audio Annotations, and more general types of time-aligned text, e.g. Karaoke, music lyrics, ticker-text, transcripts, or annotations with hyperlinks.) Here’s another short video about connecting the video of HTML5 to the Web. Another video about HTML5 and video: Impass on HTML5 and video [...]

]]> By: Dave http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/impasse-on-html-5-video/comment-page-1/#comment-616996 Dave Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:50:49 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1776#comment-616996 The only question about Theora's quality was "is it good enough for web use" the answer is a clear yes. Those who think this a competition between Theora and H.264 are confused. If Theora, or a similar freely implementable codec, did not exist then Opera would not have suggested the video tag in the first place. After all if you have no problems with codecs that aren't freely re-usable then what was the big problem with Flash or silverlight that give you a choice of several for your personal, non-commercial use at no cost? The only question about Theora’s quality was “is it good enough for web use” the answer is a clear yes. Those who think this a competition between Theora and H.264 are confused.

If Theora, or a similar freely implementable codec, did not exist then Opera would not have suggested the video tag in the first place.

After all if you have no problems with codecs that aren’t freely re-usable then what was the big problem with Flash or silverlight that give you a choice of several for your personal, non-commercial use at no cost?

]]> By: Philip Jägenstedt http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/impasse-on-html-5-video/comment-page-1/#comment-616879 Philip Jägenstedt Thu, 02 Jul 2009 06:57:50 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1776#comment-616879 Dustin, your claims about quality for the YouTube range of resolution/bitrate are greatly exaggerated. For FLV usually H.263/MP3 is used, which is easy to beat with Theora/Vorbis. I'd be thrilled to see your sources for the claims about 33% to 50% bitrate increase with Theora... H.264 is the real competition, and Greg Maxwell did a good comparison at http://people.xiph.org/~greg/video/ytcompare/comparison.html The point isn't that Theora is superior to H.264, but that it is close enough that quality is no longer the deciding factor. Dirac is nice, but its real-world use is pretty much limited to use within the BBC to transmit HD content in the same bandwidth as uncompressed SD video. It hasn't been tuned for SD or below-SD (YouTube) resolutions, and if you try the encoder for yourself that will become obvious. Nonetheless, I hope that Dirac has a role to play in the future. Dustin, your claims about quality for the YouTube range of resolution/bitrate are greatly exaggerated. For FLV usually H.263/MP3 is used, which is easy to beat with Theora/Vorbis. I’d be thrilled to see your sources for the claims about 33% to 50% bitrate increase with Theora…

H.264 is the real competition, and Greg Maxwell did a good comparison at http://people.xiph.org/~greg/video/ytcompare/comparison.html The point isn’t that Theora is superior to H.264, but that it is close enough that quality is no longer the deciding factor.

Dirac is nice, but its real-world use is pretty much limited to use within the BBC to transmit HD content in the same bandwidth as uncompressed SD video. It hasn’t been tuned for SD or below-SD (YouTube) resolutions, and if you try the encoder for yourself that will become obvious. Nonetheless, I hope that Dirac has a role to play in the future.

]]> By: Sun OMS Has A Spec | Breaking Eggs And Making Omelettes http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/impasse-on-html-5-video/comment-page-1/#comment-616862 Sun OMS Has A Spec | Breaking Eggs And Making Omelettes Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:28:15 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1776#comment-616862 [...] by way of a blog post by Opera’s Bruce Lawson describing why HTML5’s <video> tag is, well, stalled (to put it charitably), I learned [...] [...] by way of a blog post by Opera’s Bruce Lawson describing why HTML5’s <video> tag is, well, stalled (to put it charitably), I learned [...]

]]> By: Bruce Lawson's personal site : Impasse on HTML 5 video http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/impasse-on-html-5-video/comment-page-1/#comment-616805 Bruce Lawson's personal site : Impasse on HTML 5 video Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:36:30 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1776#comment-616805 [...] the original:  Bruce Lawson's personal site : Impasse on HTML 5 video SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: "Bruce Lawson's personal site : Impasse on HTML 5 video", url: [...] [...] the original:  Bruce Lawson's personal site : Impasse on HTML 5 video SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “Bruce Lawson's personal site : Impasse on HTML 5 video”, url: [...]

]]> By: Dustin Wilson http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/impasse-on-html-5-video/comment-page-1/#comment-616794 Dustin Wilson Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:11:35 +0000 http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/?p=1776#comment-616794 Oh, no. I didn't mean it that way. Apple's stance in using MPEG 4 isn't based upon greed. It's based upon the fact that they chose it for their products already, and tools are available for their platforms (and many others) to easily create the format. The ridiculous licensing fees for MPEG 4 however is greed, and that doesn't really have much to do with Apple even if they are part of the MPEG standards body. Google just wants it because much of YouTube is already in MPEG 4 for the iPhone's benefit and the fact that the alternative being brought to the table is perceived by them (and rightly so) to be vastly inferior. Theora is just as mired in theoretical software patents as Dirac is, actually. If Dirac was chosen I believe that the BBC would be pleased to find out their format was chosen, but I don't believe they really have a vested interest in it like say Microsoft does with EOT in the web font format discussion. I'm afraid that no matter what open source alternative to MPEG 4 is chosen there'll be claim chowder on its programming. My stance on the whole situation is that if Theora is chosen it needs some considerable programming contributions; it's most definitely workable in my opinion and the developers are working to improve the format. Excuse my language, but if an open sourced video format is chosen the browsers need to grow some balls and be ready for a battle because it'll happen no matter what open sourced format is chosen. Captioning is a problem, but there's an external (to the video file) text-based subtitling format many players support already or some XML-based standardized subtitling format could be created. Oh, no. I didn’t mean it that way. Apple’s stance in using MPEG 4 isn’t based upon greed. It’s based upon the fact that they chose it for their products already, and tools are available for their platforms (and many others) to easily create the format. The ridiculous licensing fees for MPEG 4 however is greed, and that doesn’t really have much to do with Apple even if they are part of the MPEG standards body. Google just wants it because much of YouTube is already in MPEG 4 for the iPhone’s benefit and the fact that the alternative being brought to the table is perceived by them (and rightly so) to be vastly inferior.

Theora is just as mired in theoretical software patents as Dirac is, actually. If Dirac was chosen I believe that the BBC would be pleased to find out their format was chosen, but I don’t believe they really have a vested interest in it like say Microsoft does with EOT in the web font format discussion. I’m afraid that no matter what open source alternative to MPEG 4 is chosen there’ll be claim chowder on its programming.

My stance on the whole situation is that if Theora is chosen it needs some considerable programming contributions; it’s most definitely workable in my opinion and the developers are working to improve the format. Excuse my language, but if an open sourced video format is chosen the browsers need to grow some balls and be ready for a battle because it’ll happen no matter what open sourced format is chosen.

Captioning is a problem, but there’s an external (to the video file) text-based subtitling format many players support already or some XML-based standardized subtitling format could be created.

]]>