Difference between revisions of "Talk:Multimedia Files"
From FreeSpace Wiki
(hmph) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:: I rewrote my edit, that is what the second edit by me was. Please do not revert it again before reading it. Please just improve it instead of rejecting it totally. [[User:Bruce89|Bruce89]] 15:18, 9 September 2007 (CDT) | :: I rewrote my edit, that is what the second edit by me was. Please do not revert it again before reading it. Please just improve it instead of rejecting it totally. [[User:Bruce89|Bruce89]] 15:18, 9 September 2007 (CDT) | ||
::: You didn't rewrite it; you simply undid my revert... Ugh. I was trying to point you in the right direction with my comments, but I see I'll have to do it myself. New edit posted. [[User:Goober5000|Goober5000]] 02:23, 11 September 2007 (CDT) | ::: You didn't rewrite it; you simply undid my revert... Ugh. I was trying to point you in the right direction with my comments, but I see I'll have to do it myself. New edit posted. [[User:Goober5000|Goober5000]] 02:23, 11 September 2007 (CDT) | ||
| − | :::: I didn't, have a look at the [http://hard-light.net/wiki/index.php?title=*.OGG&diff=12274&oldid=12205 history]. [[User:Bruce89|Bruce89]] 06: | + | :::: I didn't, have a look at the [http://hard-light.net/wiki/index.php?title=*.OGG&diff=12274&oldid=12205 history]. Here is a critical review of the content at the moment: |
| + | ::::*MP3 is not a container format, so saying "a popular competitor to .MP3" is wrong. Vorbis is "a popular competitor to .MP3", not Ogg. You could say Ogg "is a popular competitor to .MPEG", but this seems pointless. | ||
| + | ::::*"Also unlike MP3, Ogg is a container format, meaning that it..." seems clumsy, MP3 uses MPEG-1 as its container. | ||
| + | :::: [[User:Bruce89|Bruce89]] 06:53, 11 September 2007 (CDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 11:53, 11 September 2007
OGG discussion
The revert IMO seems wrong. OGG is a container, not a audio codec. I'll have a think about how to phrase this better than I did before. Bruce89 13:01, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
- The revert isn't wrong. Note that the previous version said OGG is for "compressed multimedia files", not "compressed audio files". "Multimedia" includes both audio and video. Also, I think it's sufficient for the page to say that Vorbis is for audio and Theora is for video; the additional information is worded kind of confusingly and is probably too technical anyway. Goober5000 13:52, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
- I rewrote my edit, that is what the second edit by me was. Please do not revert it again before reading it. Please just improve it instead of rejecting it totally. Bruce89 15:18, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
- You didn't rewrite it; you simply undid my revert... Ugh. I was trying to point you in the right direction with my comments, but I see I'll have to do it myself. New edit posted. Goober5000 02:23, 11 September 2007 (CDT)
- I didn't, have a look at the history. Here is a critical review of the content at the moment:
- MP3 is not a container format, so saying "a popular competitor to .MP3" is wrong. Vorbis is "a popular competitor to .MP3", not Ogg. You could say Ogg "is a popular competitor to .MPEG", but this seems pointless.
- "Also unlike MP3, Ogg is a container format, meaning that it..." seems clumsy, MP3 uses MPEG-1 as its container.
- Bruce89 06:53, 11 September 2007 (CDT)
- I didn't, have a look at the history. Here is a critical review of the content at the moment:
- You didn't rewrite it; you simply undid my revert... Ugh. I was trying to point you in the right direction with my comments, but I see I'll have to do it myself. New edit posted. Goober5000 02:23, 11 September 2007 (CDT)
- I rewrote my edit, that is what the second edit by me was. Please do not revert it again before reading it. Please just improve it instead of rejecting it totally. Bruce89 15:18, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
