(In reply to Jean-Yves Avenard [:jya] from comment #11) > I'm afraid with that logic, we would support any codecs in webm. Because AFAIK, Chrome handles mkv file exactly the same as webm. So all codecs are allowed. Yes, that seems to be the path we are on ever since we started accepting "matroska" doctype files in bug 1377278. Comment 7 in that bug covers my thoughts back then. Chrome's behaviour leaves us in an awkward position. If you think supporting FLAC in WebM/Matroska is a mistake, we can leave the codec support support as-is and WONTFIX this bug (and possible bug 1422891?).
Bug 1606822 Comment 12 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
(In reply to Jean-Yves Avenard [:jya] from comment #11) > I'm afraid with that logic, we would support any codecs in webm. Because AFAIK, Chrome handles mkv file exactly the same as webm. So all codecs are allowed. Yes, that seems to be the path we are on ever since we started accepting "matroska" doctype files in bug 1377278. Comment 7 in that bug covers my thoughts back then. Chrome's behaviour leaves us in an awkward position. If you think supporting FLAC in WebM/Matroska is a mistake, we can leave the codec support support as-is and WONTFIX this bug (and possibly bug 1422891?).