[Wikipedia-l] Video uploaded...

[Delirium]

Peter Gervai wrote:

>>In the name of freedom, we
>>are enforcing a non-standard format, 
>>    
>>
>
>On the contrary, we are enforcing STANDARD formats, and more, OPEN STANDARD
>formats. Don't confuse "standard" with "installed on most proprietary
>overmarketed systems"; availability does not make it standard. It is right
>to note, that the standard formats are not yet as widespread, but do not
>mix these. 
>  
>
I think you're misusing the term "standard".  Theora is certainly 
"open", but it is not an "open standard", because it is not a standard 
at all.  It is a product from the Xiph Foundation, which is not a 
standards body of any sort, just an open source development 
organization.  MPEG, by contrast, is an internationally recognized 
standards body, but their standard has some patent encumberance.

I think we ought to distinguish between:
-- Fully proprietary, non-standard formats (WMV, etc.)
-- Open standards whose implementation may be problematic due to patents 
(MPEG, AAC, etc.)
-- Non-standard but open and unencumbered formats (FLAC, Ogg, Theora, etc.)
-- Open standards with no patent encumberance (PNG, AIFF, etc.)

I don't think Theora falls in the last category, because there has been 
no standardization process where various concerns and issues are hashed 
out, just a unilateral implementation by Xiph.  Which I still fully 
support, of course, but it's not the same sort of thing as PNG, which is 
truly developed through a standards process.

The question for us, of course, is whether we should prefer both 
standard and non-standard open source formats, and where to draw the line.

-Mark