Time for a Timeline
January 31, 2000
Now this is all very fine, but we're still talking about
either downloading a file in the old tried-and-true way, or
delivering an audio (or video) file by itself over the
Internet. If the Internet is to support true sequential
delivery of multimedia, like TV, then we need a standard
that lets us deliver various types of audio, graphic, text
and video formats in a sequential way - that is, locked to
a timeline. We need to be able to say, "this event happens
at exactly this time, and that event happens at exactly that
time, in relation to the other events." This cannot be done
with HTML alone.
It can, of course, be done with any of the various
multimedia authoring tools, of which Macromedia's
Director is perhaps the best known. Working with the
Internet is often like reinventing the wheel - all we're
trying to do here is take something that we've been able to
do on a desktop computer for years, and do it over the
Internet, meaning in a way that is platform-independent.
Now that the bandwidth is becoming available, a host of
competing standards (naturally) have cropped up.
The aforementioned Macromedia has been offering tools for
Web multimedia delivery for years - Shockwave and
Flash. Although these are powerful tools, they are
proprietary software packages, complete with authoring tools
and a browser plug-in for playback, and they're limited in
their abilities to incorporate different types of media.
What we really crave is an open, evolving standard for
time-based multimedia delivery - something like HTML with
a sense of timing - which can incorporate any and all media
formats, including Shockwave or Flash.
This is just what the
Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL) was
designed to be. The W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
introduced SMIL in mid-1998 as a standard language for
sequential Web multimedia. SMIL is based on SGML, and has
similarities to XML. It allows audio, video, still images,
text, and even animations (including Flash) to be assembled
into complete presentations, with precise control over the
time and position of each element. With early support from
most of the major players in the Internet multimedia world,
it looked as if a new day of open standards-based Web
multimedia had dawned.
Then, of course, the predictable happened. Microsoft and
Macromedia left the SMIL tent and proposed their own
competing standard, HTML+TIME. RealNetworks, however,
embraced SMIL, and it remains the backbone of their
industry-standard G2 media player. Microsoft upgraded the
streaming capabilities of their Windows Media Player
(long scoffed at by audio weenies), and began presenting it
as a direct competitor to RealNetworks' product. And lo,
yet another format war was kindled.
And then there's QuickTime. Owned by Apple, QuickTime
started out as the native Mac video format, and has evolved
into a sophisticated streaming multimedia platform. Most
windows platforms support QuickTime, so there's no longer
anything Mac-only about it. Unlike some of Apple's other
ventures, QuickTime has not only steadily improved over the
years, but has also been decently marketed, so that it's
fairly well known. QuickTime is in fact Viable Contender
Number 3 in the Web multimedia arena, together with
RealNetworks and Microsoft.
Recently, Microsoft has rejoined the SMIL standards process,
although they continue to tout their HTML+TIME (currently
supported only by IE 5). And the current version of QuickTime
now supports SMIL. So it may be that the standards will
eventually converge, or at least that the struggle will be
concealed from the end user. But for now, there are three
main standards for Web-based sequential multimedia. As usual,
the weary developer must be prepared to produce output in all
three formats.
Audio Formats for the Web
Web Audio 2000
Authoring Tools
|