[matroska-general] Re: Guys, lets take it easy now with the Ogg/matroskacomparison

John Cannon spyder482 at yahoo.com
Wed Jan 15 14:50:18 CET 2003


> Well, yes. But you must also reckon that we didn't reach this stage on
> matroska by just working alone in a corner. We listen and see what is
> around. And as I may have misunderstood the way OGG is working, I wanted
> to make sure. And frankly even if it's working it's a real mess for
> developpers. Now I know for sure matroska is better designed than OGG.
> And I hope other people are convinced too. Starting from Emmett and
> other ppl of Xiph. Because in the end I think they will have to realise
> it. And since they want to build soemthing big, it would be better if
> it's not build on swamps...

I think being quiet until we have some code to show is a good idea.

> Anyway, for sure we're currently not in position to say people to use
> matroska instead of OGG (unless they need UDP streaming). So yes, alpha
> tools in the main priority. But as we have always done we discuss at the
> same time and change the format when needed. It's still open to changes
> in case it's needed. For example, should we allow a stream for fonts ?
> It's not needed in a file on HD. But it might be when
> streaming/broadcasting. Maybe we just need a special stream to put
> attached data inside (the same data that can be attached in a file). So
> that anything that can be attached, can be streamed too.

I think Pamel suggested that too...

John




http://matroska.org




More information about the Matroska-general mailing list