July 02, 2009

Browser vendor squabbles cause W3C to scrap codec requirement

The decision could mean third-party plug-ins needed to play multimedia content will be around for a long time

The latest rewrite of the Web's mother tongue won't recommend the use of specific audio and video encoding formats that could make it cheaper and easier for people to distribute multimedia content.

The major browser makers have been unable to agree on an encoding format they will support in their products, wrote Ian Hickson, editor of the HTML 5 specification for the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).

[ Keep up with app dev issues and trends with InfoWorld's Fatal Exception and Strategic Developer blogs. ]

Plans have been discussed for years to incorporate two new tags -- <audio> and <video> -- into HTML 5, the next specification under development. The original HTML specification never included those tags.

Because of that, people have to download plugins from various vendors to play audio and video content. If browsers support the audio and video tags, however, as well as a common encoding format, Web users wouldn't have to use third-party applications for that content.

The browser would play the content natively, which makes Web development somewhat simpler and would not require users to download a raft of plugins.

But the issue of what codec to use has been a hot potato. The codecs likely to have been recommended would have been Ogg Vorbis for audio and Ogg Theora for video, both of which can be implemented without paying royalties unlike with other formats.

Supporters for the use of those formats argue that no one company should profit or hold the power over a particular codec, which could influence its development and use depending on a company's business plans.

If browsers supported those codecs, Web developers could use open-source tools and encoders for those formats to put multimedia on their site for free, potentially striking a blow against vendors such as Adobe, Microsoft, RealNetworks and others that sell multimedia software tools.

Apple won't support Ogg Theora in QuickTime, the company's multimedia player, Hickson wrote. Apple has also expressed concern over patents associated with Ogg Theora. Even though the codec can be used royalty-free, Apple has been concerned that some party could make a claim if it ends up implemented in its products.

Opera and Mozilla oppose using the H.264 video compression standard for various reasons, including the cost of licensing the relevant patents as well distribution issues, Hickson wrote. Google uses H.264 and Ogg Theora in Chrome, but also has a problem in how it can distribute the browser through third parties due to licensing issues with H.264, he wrote. Microsoft hasn't made a commitment to support the video tag, he wrote.

"After an inordinate amount of discussions, both in public and privately, on the situation regarding codecs for <video> and <audio> in HTML 5, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that there is no suitable codec that all vendors are willing to implement and ship," Hickson wrote.

"I have therefore removed the two subsections in the HTML 5 spec in which codecs would have been required, and have instead left the matter undefined, as has in the past been done with other features," Hickson concluded.

Browser makers, however, can always make their own decision on what they want to support in their products. Mozilla's latest browser, Firefox 3.5 which was released this week, supports the audio and video tags as well as the Ogg Theora and Ogg Vorbis codecs.

Close

On Twitter now

Streaming media

Powered by Twitter

On Twitter now

White Paper

D2D Virtual Tape Library Replication Primer

This whitepaper explains the terminology and concepts behind Data Replication technologies and establishes some sizing rules through worked examples. Learn the new paradigm in disaster tolerance—protect data anywhere.

Download now »

White Paper

An Alternative to Virtualization for Datacenter Cost Savings

Server virtualization is a popular option for dealing with mounting datacenter costs. Another equally promising approach is the use of an Application Delivery Controller. Citrix NetScaler provides a low-cost way for organizations to reduce their server count and accrue cost savings from a reduction in space, cooling, power and personnel.

Download now »

White Paper

Why Your Firewall, VPN, and IEEE 802.11i Aren't Enough to Protect Your Network

The emergence of WLANs has created a new breed of security threats to enterprise networks.

Included in HP ProCurve WLAN solutions is security technology that alleviates threats from WLANs through:
* Monitoring wireless activity inside and out of the enterprise
* Classifying WLAN transmissions into harmful and harmless
* Preventing transmissions that pose a security threat to the enterprise network
* Locating participating devices for physical remediation

Download now »

White Paper

Bringing the Edge to the Data Center

Effectively address data protection challenges, implementing solutions that help store and protect business–critical data while cutting costs and improving efficiency and reliability.

Download now »
bugzappy 2-Jul-09 10:24pm
1 reply
This is excellent news! It would be very very *BAD* design if the HTML5 spec dictated what video and sound codecs were to be used when "rendering" a video or sound recording. A browser is used to browse ... web pages! so the spec for a browser should say how pages are browsed, structured, rendered, etc. The idea of _time_ does not occur in any of that. Sound and video are, obviously, strongly linked to the flow of time, for the obvious reason that they are composed of sampled data. "sampled" = "sampled at regular time interval". 30 frames/s vs 10 frames/s is a huge difference. Add jitter and things get ugly. Add phase distortion in an audio playback and you want to turn it off. HTML and CSS and javascript -- so far anyway -- have never specified anything that has to do with the flow of time, especially in a synchronous way. The javascript timer functions, and the XHR callback mechanism, are asynchronous mechanisms. That's all that javascript does in the "time domain", with very few guarantees on the order of execution of things. So all that to say that time-domain sampled-data is none of HTML's (or W3C's) business. But more specifically, some codecs are more suited to certain types of audio or video content. It has to do with how fast the image or sound changes, and how much of it changes at once, and such. A good codec for a voice conversation (telephone) is not the same as a good codec for classical music. Similarly, a good codec for a South Park type cartoon is not necessarily a good codec for, say, CNN news. Of course nobody pays attention to these details nowadays, but when HDTV and web converge, and you have to pump 10 and 100's of Gb/s of data down the pipe, we should expect the choice of codec to be a fairly dynamic thing -- remember that the telecom infrastructure is by far the most expensive part of providing any kind of online audio/video experience -- so as to hit the optimal tradeoff between cost and the quality of the user experience. In conclusion, trying to force a specific codec onto browser developers, content developers, and users is a naive thing to do. I'm glad it's not going to happen. At the same time, it was such a silly idea that they was no risk of it happening, anyway.
daserzw 2-Jul-09 10:39pm
Sorry to say, but I believe your arguments against a standard audio/video format for HTML are wrong. Spec dictation IS the job of W3C, and you can apply the same reasoning to the standard image format for the web, JPEG and PNG. What happened is that we missed a wonderful opportunity to simplify the web and have more powerful and open platform.

Sign up to receive InfoWorld Resource Alerts

Subscribe to the Developer World Newsletter

Receive a weekly roundup about the art and science of software development.

©1994-2009 Infoworld, Inc.