Lists Home |
Date Index |
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> That was why I was asking. I see the worry in that
> dimension. On the other hand, unless the technical
> need for the binary infoset is strong, neither the
> unencumbered or encumbered gadget will be used widely.
I don't see it as strong vs weak, though I do think that it is strong in a
number of industries. I see it as happening vs not happening, and it is
happening. If you have to pay royalties to send your SVG to phones made by
vendor foo, and vendor foo has a large market share, you're basically stuck.
> 1. A requirements statement is needed that will pass
> Tim and other's objections. Presumably, those in
> industries whose applications need this and are not
> MPEG members would step up to that. Why haven't they?
What do you mean by requirements statement? I know of several other consortia
that have ratified binary infosets as requirements (that may or may not be
already detailed) and will be standardizing them. This covers (non-MPEG)
broadcast, mobile, and web services. I suspect there may be others.
> 2. One would want to be aware of the MPEG patents as the
> affect the design of the gadget-to-be-standardized-and-open.
> What are the alternatives to encumbered BiM approaches? They
> used a schema-based system. I wouldn't think one could patent
> that but I've been surprised before.
I work for the people that hold those patents. Speaking for myself, I think it
may be possible to find an un-encumbering solution to standardize something
BiM-like. Apart from that, dodging patents in that area is going to be
An alternative option would be to provide an interop framework and perhaps
common foundations, and let various implementations compete. I can't say I'm a
big fan of that option.
> BTW: as you probably know, the VRML/X3D guys want this too
> and ran headlong into MPEG a while ago. I suspect the Web3D
> CAD WG will want it too.
Yes I know. IIRC they'll be looking into it in late January/early Febuary.
> What about the SVG community?
It depends on what you mean by the SVG community. I don't think the WG is
currently interested in using BiM or a similar schema, but we haven't discussed
that (at least not since I joined). As for users of SVG there is strong interest
in having a good binary format, notably for mobile and for interactive TV (which
is an excellent target for SVG 1.1 Basic). Unfortunately, I'm very concerned
that pretty soon 3GPP will ratify a non-evolvable and sub-optimal binary SVG
format that goes against the grain of XML and against where SVG seems to be
headed for the future. And if they do, the fact that SVG is mandatory in MMS
won't do that much good.
Robin Berjon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Research Engineer, Expway
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488