Diskusjon:Night of the Living Dead
WebM format[rediger kilde]
I have a hard time understanding this revert. I guess it is related to this message on my talk page. Is there a local policy that applies here and contradicts meta:video policy, according to which "WebM [is] playable in all modern browsers", and commons:video, according to which "the preferred video format is WebM" ? Please also refer to this broader policy statement and this blog page. Thanks, — Racconish ✉ 13. okt. 2014 kl. 22:00 (CEST)
@Bjørn som tegner, Noorse: Any advice on the best way to handle this ? — Racconish ✉ 13. okt. 2014 kl. 22:11 (CEST)
- Sorry I can't help you here. I use Safari, and accept all updates on that. If in trouble, I wake up my VLC-video-interpreter, but it is only on rare occasions that happens. How the Windows-programs react is beyond my ken. But I can assure anyone that my machine had no trouble at all showing the old film of Apollinaire in a silent conversation. It may then be a question of being updated, and whether one should accept new formats or not, taking into consideration that all potential readers are not necessarily updated on software. --Bjørn som tegner (diskusjon) 13. okt. 2014 kl. 23:19 (CEST)
- Thanks. Your situation - i.e. no problem - is the general case, as stated by the video policy I quoted : "WebM [is] playable in all modern browsers". Is there a specific policy on this that applies to the Norwegian project ? Otherwise, I cannot think of a valid reason to revert and go against the general Wikipedia policy on the matter. It would make more sense to upgrade one's browser if need be. — Racconish ✉ 13. okt. 2014 kl. 23:28 (CEST)
- As you've been told repeatedly, webm has not been broadly adopted here yet. There's no need to force our users to change browsers, as you would have it. Ogg is a perfectly fine format - which is recommended along with webm on the page you're quoting - until webm and HTML5 has seen general recognition here. The page says "WebM and Ogg formats are playable in all modern browsers", not ""WebM [is] playable in all modern browsers", as you claim. And vlc will play anything, as we know, so that's hardly the point. Asav (diskusjon) 14. okt. 2014 kl. 00:20 (CEST)
- Ogv is not recommended along with webm, but accepted along with it, as it is also an open format. Webm is the recommended format and it is recommended to avoid using ogv instead of webm. Kindly read again the pages I mentionned above which say this very clearly.I have been requested by an admin on Commons to use webm instead of ogv in cases such as this one, to improve the quality of the output. My ogv uploads were actually deleted and replaced by webm equivalents. Initially, I was like you : I did not know about the webm format and thought it was the fancy of an indivisual. Then I researched the matter and understood. Regards, — Racconish ✉ 14. okt. 2014 kl. 00:53 (CEST)
- Of course I'm aware of these formats and what they entail. But the point is this: They're both open formats, and some of our users cannot make use of webm, possibly since they have not yet adopted HTML5-capable browsers. You've been told this repeatedly, so again, and for the last time, do not embed formats many of our users cannot read. Asav (diskusjon) 14. okt. 2014 kl. 01:06 (CEST)
- Asav, please try to understand I am merely following the recommended best practice. Read commons:YouTube files : "If videos are available in .webm format on YouTube, they don't need to be converted to a different format before uploading them to Commons." Isn't it clear ? Cheers, — Racconish ✉ 14. okt. 2014 kl. 01:14 (CEST)
- Please try to understand that our users have problems with the format. Don't use it. Asav (diskusjon) 14. okt. 2014 kl. 01:51 (CEST)
- Raised at administrator's noticeboard. I hope this will help to find a peaceful solution. Cheers, — Racconish ✉ 14. okt. 2014 kl. 09:03 (CEST)
- Please try to understand that our users have problems with the format. Don't use it. Asav (diskusjon) 14. okt. 2014 kl. 01:51 (CEST)
- Asav, please try to understand I am merely following the recommended best practice. Read commons:YouTube files : "If videos are available in .webm format on YouTube, they don't need to be converted to a different format before uploading them to Commons." Isn't it clear ? Cheers, — Racconish ✉ 14. okt. 2014 kl. 01:14 (CEST)
- Of course I'm aware of these formats and what they entail. But the point is this: They're both open formats, and some of our users cannot make use of webm, possibly since they have not yet adopted HTML5-capable browsers. You've been told this repeatedly, so again, and for the last time, do not embed formats many of our users cannot read. Asav (diskusjon) 14. okt. 2014 kl. 01:06 (CEST)
- Ogv is not recommended along with webm, but accepted along with it, as it is also an open format. Webm is the recommended format and it is recommended to avoid using ogv instead of webm. Kindly read again the pages I mentionned above which say this very clearly.I have been requested by an admin on Commons to use webm instead of ogv in cases such as this one, to improve the quality of the output. My ogv uploads were actually deleted and replaced by webm equivalents. Initially, I was like you : I did not know about the webm format and thought it was the fancy of an indivisual. Then I researched the matter and understood. Regards, — Racconish ✉ 14. okt. 2014 kl. 00:53 (CEST)
- As you've been told repeatedly, webm has not been broadly adopted here yet. There's no need to force our users to change browsers, as you would have it. Ogg is a perfectly fine format - which is recommended along with webm on the page you're quoting - until webm and HTML5 has seen general recognition here. The page says "WebM and Ogg formats are playable in all modern browsers", not ""WebM [is] playable in all modern browsers", as you claim. And vlc will play anything, as we know, so that's hardly the point. Asav (diskusjon) 14. okt. 2014 kl. 00:20 (CEST)
- Thanks. Your situation - i.e. no problem - is the general case, as stated by the video policy I quoted : "WebM [is] playable in all modern browsers". Is there a specific policy on this that applies to the Norwegian project ? Otherwise, I cannot think of a valid reason to revert and go against the general Wikipedia policy on the matter. It would make more sense to upgrade one's browser if need be. — Racconish ✉ 13. okt. 2014 kl. 23:28 (CEST)