On Sat, Oct 28, 2006 at 11:10:30AM +0100, Måns Rullgård
wrote:
> >> Some notes on rationale are welcome too, but
not strictly necessary.
> >>
> >> Now you may as well forget all this anyway.
Without a defined way of
> >> determining the codec for a stream, the format
is useless. As you
> >> have previously refused to do anything about
this, I'm not pursuing it
> >> further.
> >
> > i never had a problem with identifying codecs with
fourccs, at least
> > not more then i had with the mpeg systems (chinese
avs and ac3 come to
> > mind here) really i dont understand why you like
one integer more then
> > another
>
> I prefer a DOCUMENTED integer over an UNDOCUMENTED one.
I don't give
> a rat's ass about the exact values.
OK then see below and add this to the spec...
> > the issue really is IMHO that every system which
has been used in
> > practice to store many different formats has
accumulated some mess
> > actually it seems that the number of formats used
in practice and
> > the number of somewhat messed up cases (divx vs.
mpeg4 for example)
> > is very highly correlated
>
> That's because AVI doesn't specify anything, so you
HAVE TO invent
> something. Yeah, I've heard of some kind of official
registry of
> codec IDs, but did you ever try finding it?
No, you don't have to. What you specify is: THIS FIELD
CONTAINS VALUES
GENERALLY AGREED UPON BY THE PUBLIC. WHEN MULTIPLE VALUES
ARE IN
COMMON USE, RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MADE AS TO THE PREFERRED
VALUE FOR USE
IN NUT.
THERE WILL BE NO CODEC ID REGISTRY!
> > so sitting down and designing yet another will
likely achive nothing
> > either its not used by anyone or it will
accumulate the same mess
> > as every other system, or how do you want to
prevent that?
> > if you use strings instead of 32bit integers you
will end up with
> > a much much bigger mess because people _can_
missuse it much better
>
> What you're saying is that because any system CAN be
abused, rather
> try to start out with something sane, you incorporate
an existing,
> already very abused, "system" lock, stock and
barrel. Makes no sense
> to me.
Look, we already finished NUT. This is over and decided.
Please stop
bringing up old flames again! I am so sick of explaining
over and over
why we made the decision we did and why it's vastly superior
to all
the other proposals which claim to "fix the
problem" but fail, and
moreover that there is in fact no problem to be fixed.
Rich
_______________________________________________
NUT-devel mailing list
NUT-devel mplayerhq.hu
http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/nut-devel
|