I am completely opposed to web standards including proprietary codecs. HTML5 should have Theora (or some other open gratis and libre codec) as the standard which all browsers wishing to be HTML5 compliant must be able to handle - this does not stop anyone from using h264 if they wish to. What it does is ensure that the web remains as free and open to use as possible.
You seem not to realize that Apple and Microsoft are the ones writing the "standards". Their goal is use HTML5 to make money, not to make the web "more free" or something.
>You seem not to realize that Apple and Microsoft are the ones writing the "standards".
Nope I thought it was the WHAT-WG and the HTML WG at the W3C. Yes major corporations have direct influence on these groups but so to do the OSS friendly browser corps and to some extent web designers and users.
Google are already using h264 in HTML5 on YouTube for capable browsers aren't they? Are they sending Theora/Vorbis streams at all? Seems clear where they are going then.
Google are currently using H.264 for everyone on Youtube. That's what they send to iPhone, most of the higher quality Flash videos and the new HTML5 trial.
However, they support Theora in both Chrome and Chromium. In the Chromium OS demos they demonstrated playing Theora files from an SD card. They also purchased a company that creates codecs that don't infringe on MPEG patents and which was the original source of Theora.
I don't think it's clear at all which "side" Google is taking on this because as a large they'll get some benefit whether the web adopts royalty free codecs or not (e.g. if small, community specific Youtube competitors pay more per video than giant sites like Youtube that's good, but more video on the web generally probably helps Google too).
You seem not to realize that Apple and Microsoft are the ones writing the "standards". Their goal is use HTML5 to make money, not to make the web "more free" or something.
Our only hope is that Google takes a stand.