[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Massive Content-Type definition ideas & Gopher

1993-06-07 11:54:18
To:  moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu
Subject:  Re: Massive Content-Type definition ideas & Gopher
Date:  Mon, 7 Jun 93 11:39:02 PDT

Keith Moore wrote:

It's not anywhere nearly that bad.  First of all, we don't need multiple
compression algorithms -- we need one that everyone can use freely.

I slightly disagree with this.  There are 2 types of compression: 1)
content-type specific compression algorithm, 2) general purpose 

The content-type specific compression is tuned specifically for a certain
type of data, e.g. audio uses adpcm audio compression.  Unless we create
a new subtype for the compressed audio data [...]

I propose that we do exactly that.  audio/basic is already compressed in the
sense that 14-bit samples are mapped onto an 8-bit mu-law encoding.  Most
audio compression algorithms are lossy, and stacking one compression
algorithm on top of another really trashes the signal.  I conclude that we
don't want to add further compression to audio/basic (the only audio type
defined so far), and that other audio compression schemes should go in a
different audio subtype.