On Thursday 01 June 2006 12:07, Oded Shimon wrote:
Nag no. 2. Be warned, when SVN comes up I'll commit both these patches. (unless someone complains now..)
I re-read the previous discussion on fourcc's and I don't want to restart it or anything if the main nut devs agree on sticking to four bytes, but what is the reason for not using a wider field? I agree that all sorts of implementation specific names should be avoided, but I always found fourcc's rather limited. Examples are 'drac' and 'vrbs' where 'dirac' and 'vorbis' are a lot clearer. Plus: +4,"mp2 " MP3 +4,"mp3 " MP2 :-) Also: + identification for the codec, must comply to fourcc.txt I would write "MUST comply" to emphasize that non-complying strings should be rejected by the muxer. --Ivo