The whole idea is project specific,we are not converting to wav, but since its the only format that browsers can easily upload in for the time being.
Thanks
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Sebastian Hellmann < hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
You didn't include the list in your reply. What about: http://firefogg.org/ ? -- Sebastain
Am 10.04.2013 23:41, schrieb Rahul Maliakkal:
The point is not about efficiency rather the only format that browsers can presently capture into. As browsers add support for AAC converting / uploads, then we will prefer that.
Thanks
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Sebastian Hellmann < hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
Well, I guess this should be researched quite well, before investing time in this feature:
WAV
WAVEform audio format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAV (WAV) is a Microsoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft and IBMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM audio file format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_format for storing audio on PCs. It is the main format used on Microsoft Windowshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windowssystems for raw audio storage. The WAV format is most commonly used with an uncompressed, lossless storage method (pulse-code modulation) resulting in comparatively large audio files. Today, the WAV audio format is no longer popular being superseded by other more efficient means of audio storage. [19]http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Open_Standards/Comparison_of_File_Formats#cite_note-19
from http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Open_Standards/Comparison_of_File_Formats#...
So who wants "wav" files actually, they are normally very large as well.
The legal status is not so obvious. Maybe you even need a lawyer to judge this correctly. Again, is .wav really so popular, that it justifies the effort?
All the best, Sebastian
Am 10.04.2013 19:40, schrieb Federico Leva (Nemo):
Rahul Maliakkal, 10/04/2013 19:27:
As we all know right now uploading an audio file is only possible in .ogg format.
In my GSOC project , i plan on adding *.wav support* to commons ,since its not patent encumbered i think it should be fine
Context: "Pronunciation Recording Extension" https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Rahul21/Gsoc
I would like to get the communities feedback on this.
Is the reason that the dependencies you found all require this format?
Nemo
Wiktionary-l mailing list Wiktionary-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
-- Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://linguistics.okfn.org , http://dbpedia.org/Wiktionary , http://dbpedia.org Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann Research Group: http://aksw.org
-- Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://linguistics.okfn.org , http://dbpedia.org/Wiktionary , http://dbpedia.org Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann Research Group: http://aksw.org
On 04/10/2013 03:16 PM, Rahul Maliakkal wrote:
In my GSOC project , i plan on adding *.wav support* to commons
As of today this falls in the category of "NO to projects depending on unconvinced maintainers". In this case the Commons maintainers.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Allowable_file_types
If the Commons community is happy to take this format, fine. But we need to know before the deadline for accepting projects. Or you need to change your strategy.
Another question is of course how feasible is to include "adding *.wav support* to commons" in the scope of your project.
Relevant: WAV audio support via TimedMediaHandler https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32135
Good to see that mdale is already involved there.
On 04/10/2013 07:29 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
If the Commons community is happy to take this format, fine. But we need to know before the deadline for accepting projects. Or you need to change your strategy.
An alternative approach is server-side conversion to a Commons-approved format such as Ogg, before uploading to Commons.
Matt Flaschen
On 4/10/13 4:29 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
On 04/10/2013 03:16 PM, Rahul Maliakkal wrote:
In my GSOC project , i plan on adding *.wav support* to commons
I don't see any email on this list that includes that quote, nor does Ruhul's GSoC proposal mention anything about WAV. Could you provide some context by either quoting the entire message or pointing to where this discussion is actually taking place? Thanks!
Ryan Kaldari
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
I don't see any email on this list that includes that quote, nor does Ruhul's GSoC proposal mention anything about WAV. Could you provide some context by either quoting the entire message or pointing to where this discussion is actually taking place? Thanks!
Looks like it was on commons-l today.
-Jeremy
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.orgwrote:
On 4/10/13 4:29 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
On 04/10/2013 03:16 PM, Rahul Maliakkal wrote:
In my GSOC project , i plan on adding *.wav support* to commons
I don't see any email on this list that includes that quote, nor does Ruhul's GSoC proposal mention anything about WAV. Could you provide some context by either quoting the entire message or pointing to where this discussion is actually taking place? Thanks!
Ryan Kaldari
I will be uploading my v2.0 of my gsoc proposal today ,you could see it
then
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-April/068336.html(Scrol...
down a littlle bit :P)
______________________________**_________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikitech-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 11 April 2013 00:29, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
As of today this falls in the category of "NO to projects depending on unconvinced maintainers". In this case the Commons maintainers. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Allowable_file_types If the Commons community is happy to take this format, fine. But we need to know before the deadline for accepting projects. Or you need to change your strategy.
That's just a list of formats that are enabled in the software, that are free formats. There wasn't a vote on WebM, for example - it was more like "finally!" when it became technically feasible.
- d.
On 04/11/2013 12:00 AM, David Gerard wrote:
On 11 April 2013 00:29, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
As of today this falls in the category of "NO to projects depending on unconvinced maintainers". In this case the Commons maintainers. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Allowable_file_types If the Commons community is happy to take this format, fine. But we need to know before the deadline for accepting projects. Or you need to change your strategy.
That's just a list of formats that are enabled in the software, that are free formats. There wasn't a vote on WebM, for example - it was more like "finally!" when it became technically feasible.
I'm just trying to be consistent: a GSOC project can't force the agenda of a Wikimedia project.
Also conservative when it comes to manage GSOC students expectations. These bug reports have been open for years, and I don't want to guarantee to a GSOC student that they can count on seeing them fixed now.
Bug 20252 - Support for WAV and AIFF by converting files to FLAC automatically https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20252
Bug 32135 - WAV audio support via TimedMediaHandler https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32135
Then again, a GSOC project can be a catalyst of change if you get a determined student and a qualified mentor to agree on something and push the agenda. We have the ingredients here, but sill you need to move fast to see if this is a missing feature just because, or if the Commons community has some strong opinion about it.
I'm not the one to be convinced and probably wikitech-l is not the place to have a decision either. Please continue the discussion in the bug reports, making sure the Commons community is aware and involved.
On 04/11/2013 10:48 AM, Quim Gil wrote:
I'm just trying to be consistent: a GSOC project can't force the agenda of a Wikimedia project.
Also conservative when it comes to manage GSOC students expectations. These bug reports have been open for years, and I don't want to guarantee to a GSOC student that they can count on seeing them fixed now.
Bug 20252 - Support for WAV and AIFF by converting files to FLAC automatically https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20252
Bug 32135 - WAV audio support via TimedMediaHandler https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32135
Adding Wav to TMH is a pretty small technical addition. Audio transcoding was already added by Jan. Adding .wav support on top of that, is probably one of the easiest parts of the project.
I don't think the project would be forcing an agenda on commons, its analogous work to add TIFF support a while back. Also this is mostly an intermediate solution while browsers can only capture and upload PCM wav data. Once browsers ship the full record api, we will be able to 'export out' the captured Opus audio and upload that. Then transcode from that Opus oga to additional formats that can be played in ( other ) browsers and devices.
--michael
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 4:59 AM, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 04/10/2013 03:16 PM, Rahul Maliakkal wrote:
In my GSOC project , i plan on adding *.wav support* to commons
As of today this falls in the category of "NO to projects depending on unconvinced maintainers". In this case the Commons maintainers.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Commons:Project_scope/** Allowable_file_typeshttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Allowable_file_types
If the Commons community is happy to take this format, fine. But we need to know before the deadline for accepting projects. Or you need to change your strategy.
Another question is of course how feasible is to include "adding *.wav support* to commons" in the scope of your project.
In my extension i plan on adding 5 second recordings of words, 5 seconds
of .wav would be at max 200 kb more than 5 seconds of .ogg(worst case).I dont see any harm in that.
Is an exclusive permission possible ?
Relevant: WAV audio support via TimedMediaHandler https://bugzilla.wikimedia.**org/show_bug.cgi?id=32135https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32135
Good to see that mdale is already involved there.
Micheal has been really helpful uptill now
-- Quim Gil Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**User:Qgilhttp://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
______________________________**_________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikitech-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org