Please. Although WebM is a promising format, it's not available yet. The Java fallback is a solution even worse than just using Fash, so if we want to get with this century, I believe we have to hold our noses and adopt a modern format.
On Monday, March 19, 2012, Brion Vibber <br...@pobox.com> wrote: > As some may know, we've restricted videos on Wikimedia sites to the > freely-licensed Ogg Theora codec for some years, with some intention to > support other non-patent-encumbered formats like WebM. > > One of our partners in pushing for free formats was Mozilla; Fire fox's > HTML5 video supports only Theora and WebM. > > The prime competing format, H.264, has potential patent issues - like other > MPEG standards there's a patent pool and certain licensing rules. It's also > nearly got an exclusive choke hold on mobile - so much so that Mozilla is > considering ways to adopt H.264 support to avoid being left behind: > > http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2012/03/18/video-user-experience-and-our-mission/ > > Is it time for us to think about H.264 encoding on our own videos? > > Right now users of millions of mobile phones and tablets have no access to > our audio and video content, and our old desktop fallback of using a Java > applet is unavailable. > > In theory we can produce a configuration with TimedMediaHandler to produce > both H.264 and Theora/WebM transcodes, bringing Commons media to life for > mobile users and Apple and Microsoft browser users. > > What do we think about this? What are the pros and cons? > > -- brion > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > -- Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
