muxing xmp in to webm
672 views
Skip to first unread message
fishor
Jan 11, 2011, 1:59:59 AM1/11/11
to WebM Discussion
Hi all,
i know webm was primarily designed for the web, so there is no extras
allowed in this container. But slowly it get some attention on
desktops daily use and there is some lack of management possibilities.
I talking about tagging and metadata. Are there any plans to support
xmp im webm? And subtitles?
Matroska support it, so it is not a real technical problem. The
problem is, to make it sort of legal.
i know webm was primarily designed for the web, so there is no extras
allowed in this container. But slowly it get some attention on
desktops daily use and there is some lack of management possibilities.
I talking about tagging and metadata. Are there any plans to support
xmp im webm? And subtitles?
Matroska support it, so it is not a real technical problem. The
problem is, to make it sort of legal.
Steve Lhomme
Jan 11, 2011, 3:21:08 AM1/11/11
to webm-d...@webmproject.org
I think subtitles for WebM are preferred as external so the browser
can do more things with it.
can do more things with it.
On the metadata side, nothing is defined right now. And I also think
it's a major need in WebM (like EXIF data in JPEG files).
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WebM Discussion" group.
> To post to this group, send email to webm-d...@webmproject.org.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to webm-discuss...@webmproject.org.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/webm-discuss/?hl=en.
>
>
--
Steve Lhomme
Matroska association Charmain
antistress
Jan 11, 2011, 11:38:33 AM1/11/11
to WebM Discussion
Metadata in WebM will be more and more important considering that
maybe electronic devices will allow WebM encoding in the future
http://blog.webmproject.org/2011/01/availability-of-webm-vp8-video-hardware.html
On 11 jan, 09:21, Steve Lhomme <slho...@matroska.org> wrote:
> I think subtitles for WebM are preferred as external so the browser
> can do more things with it.
>
> On the metadata side, nothing is defined right now. And I also think
> it's a major need in WebM (like EXIF data in JPEG files).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 7:59 AM, fishor <lexa.fis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > i know webm was primarily designed for the web, so there is no extras
> > allowed in this container. But slowly it get some attention on
> > desktops daily use and there is some lack of management possibilities.
> > I talking about tagging and metadata. Are there any plans to support
> > xmp im webm? And subtitles?
> > Matroska support it, so it is not a real technical problem. The
> > problem is, to make it sort of legal.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WebM Discussion" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to webm-disc...@webmproject.org.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to webm-discuss+unsubscr...@webmproject.org.
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/webm-discuss/?hl=en.
maybe electronic devices will allow WebM encoding in the future
http://blog.webmproject.org/2011/01/availability-of-webm-vp8-video-hardware.html
On 11 jan, 09:21, Steve Lhomme <slho...@matroska.org> wrote:
> I think subtitles for WebM are preferred as external so the browser
> can do more things with it.
>
> On the metadata side, nothing is defined right now. And I also think
> it's a major need in WebM (like EXIF data in JPEG files).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 7:59 AM, fishor <lexa.fis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > i know webm was primarily designed for the web, so there is no extras
> > allowed in this container. But slowly it get some attention on
> > desktops daily use and there is some lack of management possibilities.
> > I talking about tagging and metadata. Are there any plans to support
> > xmp im webm? And subtitles?
> > Matroska support it, so it is not a real technical problem. The
> > problem is, to make it sort of legal.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WebM Discussion" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to webm-discuss+unsubscr...@webmproject.org.
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/webm-discuss/?hl=en.
fishor
Jan 13, 2011, 5:33:20 AM1/13/11
to WebM Discussion
It is true,
as i understand, google do not car about metadata. The target is
cloud, and in cloud all data they need can be stored in the database.
My target is desktop, to organize and share files in need build in
metadata.
So what is real impotent to me is official statement of google: such
as - yes we plan to add matadata to webm, or just no.
If no - we need other container: matroska or ogg. If we will use other
container, this will add extra "format" to car about. To share it on
the internet we need convert it. and so on... one more format will be
not accepted. People from firefox ready answered - with no.
So the situation is really bad.
May be i should post it to slashdot and let people spam this tread.
On Jan 11, 5:38 pm, antistress <thibaut.beth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Metadata in WebM will be more and more important considering that
> maybe electronic devices will allow WebM encoding in the futurehttp://blog.webmproject.org/2011/01/availability-of-webm-vp8-video-ha...
as i understand, google do not car about metadata. The target is
cloud, and in cloud all data they need can be stored in the database.
My target is desktop, to organize and share files in need build in
metadata.
So what is real impotent to me is official statement of google: such
as - yes we plan to add matadata to webm, or just no.
If no - we need other container: matroska or ogg. If we will use other
container, this will add extra "format" to car about. To share it on
the internet we need convert it. and so on... one more format will be
not accepted. People from firefox ready answered - with no.
So the situation is really bad.
May be i should post it to slashdot and let people spam this tread.
On Jan 11, 5:38 pm, antistress <thibaut.beth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Metadata in WebM will be more and more important considering that
Steve Lhomme
Jan 13, 2011, 8:16:01 AM1/13/11
to webm-d...@webmproject.org
First of all threading to spam is not going to bring you more help,
quite the contrary.
quite the contrary.
Second, WebM uses Matroska and as such can skip elements it doesn't
understand. Google doesn't have to make a formal statement for things
to evolve. If you add the regular Matroska tags in a WebM file, it
will still be usable as WebM and any Matroska aware program that can
make use of these tags will do. So there is no technical issue here.
And you can already use tags today.
The only possible issue is if the tagging system used in WebM (I can't
imagine there won't be one) is incompatible with the Matroska one.
Steve
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WebM Discussion" group.
> To post to this group, send email to webm-d...@webmproject.org.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to webm-discuss...@webmproject.org.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/webm-discuss/?hl=en.
>
>
--
Steve Lhomme
Matroska association Chairman
fishor
Jan 13, 2011, 9:53:55 AM1/13/11
to WebM Discussion
On Jan 13, 2:16 pm, Steve Lhomme <slho...@matroska.org> wrote:
> First of all threading to spam is not going to bring you more help,
> quite the contrary.
Correct. But I newer get any response from google devs, are there any
> First of all threading to spam is not going to bring you more help,
> quite the contrary.
special lists you contact them? Till now i get filling, you can get
response only after spam.
> Second, WebM uses Matroska and as such can skip elements it doesn't
> understand. Google doesn't have to make a formal statement for things
> to evolve. If you add the regular Matroska tags in a WebM file, it
> will still be usable as WebM and any Matroska aware program that can
> make use of these tags will do. So there is no technical issue here.
> And you can already use tags today.
>
> The only possible issue is if the tagging system used in WebM (I can't
> imagine there won't be one) is incompatible with the Matroska one.
documentation:
http://www.webmproject.org/code/specs/container/
only now i checked mkvtools and ... it can mux WebM with xml or any
thing else. Only small difference to matroska.
My excuse to Steve.
fishor
Jan 13, 2011, 9:57:17 AM1/13/11
to WebM Discussion
Seems like there is actually official work in progress ...
http://code.google.com/p/webm/issues/detail?id=242
http://code.google.com/p/webm/issues/detail?id=242
Frank Galligan
Jan 13, 2011, 10:18:33 AM1/13/11
to webm-d...@webmproject.org
Adding metadata to WebM is important, but so are many other things. Unfortunately at Google we only have a certain amount of resources to work on WebM. To add metadata to WebM someone needs to make a proposal of what to add and how it should be laid out in WebM files. The proposal can come from anyone and post on this list so everyone can talk about it.
Frank
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:57 AM, fishor <lexa....@gmail.com> wrote:
Seems like there is actually official work in progress ...
http://code.google.com/p/webm/issues/detail?id=242
fishor
Jan 13, 2011, 10:31:12 AM1/13/11
to WebM Discussion
Thank you for response :)
xmp:Rating -> for rating
dc:subject -> for labels
dc:relation or xmp:Label -> for events
xmp:MetadataDate -> last date metadata was modifyed
dc:source -> where we got this file from (path or storage name or
website (youtube), just some thing to help find where is it from)
xmpRights:* -> this is mostly interesting on publishing or export.
xmpMM:DocumentID -> uuid of the new image, if we get file which
contain same DocumentID like one from say my database, it should try
to compare
it (md5sum or some thing like this) if file checksum is not same it
is
some modification of file what we have.
And to keep track of modifications:
xmpMM:History
xmpMM:VersionID
xmpMM:Versions
For recording devices you will probably will all exif:* fields.
all of this are fields according xmp specification:
http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/xmp/sdk/XMPspecification.pdf
On Jan 13, 4:18 pm, Frank Galligan <fgalli...@google.com> wrote:
> Adding metadata to WebM is important, but so are many other things.
> Unfortunately at Google we only have a certain amount of resources to work
> on WebM. To add metadata to WebM someone needs to make a proposal of what to
> add and how it should be laid out in WebM files. The proposal can come from
> anyone and post on this list so everyone can talk about it.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:57 AM, fishor <lexa.fis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Seems like there is actually official work in progress ...
>
> >http://code.google.com/p/webm/issues/detail?id=242
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "WebM Discussion" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to webm-disc...@webmproject.org.
> > .
xmp:Rating -> for rating
dc:subject -> for labels
dc:relation or xmp:Label -> for events
xmp:MetadataDate -> last date metadata was modifyed
dc:source -> where we got this file from (path or storage name or
website (youtube), just some thing to help find where is it from)
xmpRights:* -> this is mostly interesting on publishing or export.
xmpMM:DocumentID -> uuid of the new image, if we get file which
contain same DocumentID like one from say my database, it should try
to compare
it (md5sum or some thing like this) if file checksum is not same it
is
some modification of file what we have.
And to keep track of modifications:
xmpMM:History
xmpMM:VersionID
xmpMM:Versions
For recording devices you will probably will all exif:* fields.
all of this are fields according xmp specification:
http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/xmp/sdk/XMPspecification.pdf
On Jan 13, 4:18 pm, Frank Galligan <fgalli...@google.com> wrote:
> Adding metadata to WebM is important, but so are many other things.
> Unfortunately at Google we only have a certain amount of resources to work
> on WebM. To add metadata to WebM someone needs to make a proposal of what to
> add and how it should be laid out in WebM files. The proposal can come from
> anyone and post on this list so everyone can talk about it.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:57 AM, fishor <lexa.fis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Seems like there is actually official work in progress ...
>
> >http://code.google.com/p/webm/issues/detail?id=242
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "WebM Discussion" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > webm-discuss+unsubscr...@webmproject.org<webm-discuss%2Bunsubscr...@webmproject.org>
> > .
antistress
Jan 13, 2011, 6:51:58 PM1/13/11
to WebM Discussion
see also that former discussion :
http://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/webm-discuss/browse_thread/thread/2a44b0ee33b39b13/e5323ec2b0cf194f
On 13 jan, 16:31, fishor <lexa.fis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for response :)
>
> xmp:Rating -> for rating
> dc:subject -> for labels
>
> dc:relation or xmp:Label -> for events
>
> xmp:MetadataDate -> last date metadata was modifyed
>
> dc:source -> where we got this file from (path or storage name or
> website (youtube), just some thing to help find where is it from)
>
> xmpRights:* -> this is mostly interesting on publishing or export.
>
> xmpMM:DocumentID -> uuid of the new image, if we get file which
> contain same DocumentID like one from say my database, it should try
> to compare
> it (md5sum or some thing like this) if file checksum is not same it
> is
> some modification of file what we have.
>
> And to keep track of modifications:
> xmpMM:History
> xmpMM:VersionID
> xmpMM:Versions
>
> For recording devices you will probably will all exif:* fields.
>
> all of this are fields according xmp specification:http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/xmp/sdk/XMPspecificatio...
http://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/group/webm-discuss/browse_thread/thread/2a44b0ee33b39b13/e5323ec2b0cf194f
On 13 jan, 16:31, fishor <lexa.fis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for response :)
>
> xmp:Rating -> for rating
> dc:subject -> for labels
>
> dc:relation or xmp:Label -> for events
>
> xmp:MetadataDate -> last date metadata was modifyed
>
> dc:source -> where we got this file from (path or storage name or
> website (youtube), just some thing to help find where is it from)
>
> xmpRights:* -> this is mostly interesting on publishing or export.
>
> xmpMM:DocumentID -> uuid of the new image, if we get file which
> contain same DocumentID like one from say my database, it should try
> to compare
> it (md5sum or some thing like this) if file checksum is not same it
> is
> some modification of file what we have.
>
> And to keep track of modifications:
> xmpMM:History
> xmpMM:VersionID
> xmpMM:Versions
>
> For recording devices you will probably will all exif:* fields.
>
Vladimir Pantelic
Jan 14, 2011, 5:49:26 AM1/14/11
to webm-d...@webmproject.org
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Steve Lhomme <slh...@matroska.org> wrote:
> First of all threading to spam is not going to bring you more help,
> quite the contrary.
>
> Second, WebM uses Matroska and as such can skip elements it doesn't
> understand. Google doesn't have to make a formal statement for things
> to evolve. If you add the regular Matroska tags in a WebM file, it
> will still be usable as WebM and any Matroska aware program that can
> make use of these tags will do. So there is no technical issue here.
> And you can already use tags today.
> First of all threading to spam is not going to bring you more help,
> quite the contrary.
>
> Second, WebM uses Matroska and as such can skip elements it doesn't
> understand. Google doesn't have to make a formal statement for things
> to evolve. If you add the regular Matroska tags in a WebM file, it
> will still be usable as WebM and any Matroska aware program that can
> make use of these tags will do. So there is no technical issue here.
> And you can already use tags today.
which still will be not much use if prominent WebM capable SW like FF
ignore everything outside of "strict" WebM...
Steve Lhomme
Jan 15, 2011, 8:13:01 AM1/15/11
to webm-discuss
Well, most tagging systems I know are not "closed", in that custom
fields can always be added. And that's very much in the spirit of a
semantic web as well. There is an endless way to tag content (and
mapping is usually necessary).
fields can always be added. And that's very much in the spirit of a
semantic web as well. There is an endless way to tag content (and
mapping is usually necessary).
One mapping between "common" tagging systems is described here:
http://age.hobba.nl/audio/tag_frame_reference.html
It doesn't include XMP, but I guess most of the fields mentioned could
fit somewhere in there.
Steve
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages