 |
 |
Have a look at the ongoing battles between MPEG4 and Ogg for the browser video space. I don't know of your second criteria for b), however - not many people are using Ogg (yet) http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/07/06/ogg-theora-h-264-and-the-html-5-browser-squabble/ http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/07/decoding-the-html-5-video-codec-debate.ars -Andrew On 13-Jul-09, at 12:22 PM, Walter Lewis wrote: > Are there any blindingly obvious examples of instances where > a) a standards group produced a standard published by a body > which charged for access to it > and > b) a alternative standards groups produced a competing standard > that was openly accessible > and the work of group a) was rendered totally irrelevant because > most non-commercial work ignored it in favour of b). > > My instinct is to quote the battle between OSI (ISO) and TCP/IP > (IETF RFCs). Does that strike others as appropriate? > > Any examples closer to the library world? > > Walter Lewis