[Matroska-devel] Re: [Ffmpeg-devel] Adding matroska support to FFMPEG via libmatroska/libebml, in C++ ?

Steve Lhomme steve.lhomme at free.fr
Tue Oct 14 15:42:45 CEST 2003

Christian HJ Wiesner wrote:

> I love this guy, really i do :) ! Mosu, you are sooo right about this, i 
> really hope you will stay with the project for a very long time !! IMHO 
> and as stated on IRC just a couple of minutes ago, compatibility and 
> playability should always be the higher goals than trying to save a few 
> 100 KB of overhead. If i would be the main developer, i would also make 
> much stricter specs than robux4 did, as IMHO the freedom of the 
> programmer/developer for file creation should stand behind the needs of 
> the users, and that is to have a file that plays fine under all 
> circumstances, and on all players ... just think of the potentially 
> upcoming hardware devices, and consider what damage you can do to the 
> project if those companies using matroska to overcome compatibility 
> problem with b0rked and hacked AVI files on their hardware units, run 
> into exactly those when users create fancy MKV files and they will not 
> play :( ...

Yes but,
1) Alex's test shows that we do have the smaller overhead. (that was not 
obivous to him before). So now he cannot claim anymore than AVI can beat 
MKV. (of course there are probably cases where it would, but not in 90% 
of cases)

2) This is only for specific audio codecs that have internal framing. 
I'm 90% sure any hardware/software player that can decode these will 
have no problem being fed with multiple frames at once. I know this is 
the case for MP3 at least. And as, so far, we are the ones who define 
how each codec should interpret data out of a Block. We can change it 
easily and that will be the standard way in matroska. And that won't 
prevent anyone from using 1frame=1block. So I see no real compatibility 
problem here.

More information about the Matroska-devel mailing list