On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 03:45:09PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
Hi
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 05:41:54AM +0300, Oded Shimon wrote:
On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 08:16:03PM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
"Ivan Kalvachev" <ikalvachev@gmail.com> writes:
Before continuing flame, I would like to know if we are going to use fourcc, will we create our own list or just use the avi one?
I believe the idea was to use a reduced avi 4cc list, that is with only one code per codec.
On a side note, I still think there is way to much fixation on the 4cc thing in the first place, but that's probably just me...
Resuming bikeshed topic. Warning, no replies within 7 days is taken as no complaints.
alternative suggestion:
fourcc identification for the codec MUST be <=4 bytes long
Since we seem to be padding with spaces, I would s/<=/=/.
SHOULD be made of alphanumerical chars
s/alphanumeric/printable ascii/ (dash, plus, etc. are ok)
if there are several possible values to choose from then the one used in the source file if any SHOULD be prefered, if there are still several options left then the one with the most descriptive name SHOULD be preferred
I don't like this. The idea of "source file" does not belong in the spec, and source files are full of disgusting nonsense fourcc's like "DIVX" anyway. Rich