Re: Tidy up of XiphWiki VorbisComment page

2009/6/29 Martin Leese <[email protected]>:
> I have been tidying up the VorbisComment
> page in the XiphWiki.  The problem with it was
> that it was a mixture of proposals and
> discussion of those proposals.  This made it
> difficult for implementers to see what to
> implement.

great! that page had grown quite a lot ...

> The problem section is:
> http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/VorbisComment#New_ENCODER_field_name_proposal
>
> This is a mess, and all I could do was add
> attributions to the discussion.  Will somebody
> who was involved in the discussion please tidy
> up this mess.

I've sorted it into what seem to be three separate topics: ENCODER in
general, inclusion of a URL, and ENCODED_BY.

Also (in a separate commit) added some chatty rationale in response to
"What is lacking from the vendor string present in the spec from the
start? All libvorbis and encoder tunings I'm aware of have recorded
the encoder version here":

Rationale for not using the vendor string:

    * The vendor string is usually used to store the name and version
of the underlying codec library
    * The idea of ENCODER is to store the name of the user-visible
application, for example ffmpeg2theora.
    * It can be useful for debugging to store the name and version of
the calling application.
    * The libvorbis API does not let applications override the vendor string.

Conrad.