[Nottingham] webm & vp8

[Martin Garton]

On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 21:44 +0100, James Holland wrote:
> Well it's a good thing in general, but I dislike the way they
> essentially finalised an unfinished product.
> They've drawn an arbitrary line in development and said "This is it:
> This is the standard."

I agree that they could have worked on this more, but I also think they
understandably wanted to get it out quick before x264 became
irreversibly entrenched as the only format for html5.

Also, they have finalised the spec, but there is still massive scope for
improvements to the encoder.

In any case, I think vp8 is a huge leap for free formats.

Finally is it possible that some of the apparently unfinished aspects of
the spec were deliberately left "unfinished" in order to avoid
infringing on patents on the h264 techniques?  I've read this in a few
places, none of them authoritative.

-- 
Martin.