Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (8168)

• Is there a way to use ffmpeg binary on anroid platform in MAUI project ?

  18 août 2023, par Mrand

  Currently I'm working on my test project about capabilities of MAUI and ffmpeg, so I can create my own applications. I got stuck on problem about using ffmpeg on platforms other than Windows (for example Anroid).

  


  I tried googling the problem, didn't find anything helpful. Right now my ffmpeg for Android binary is situated inside Platforms/Android/Assets/libs as AndroidAsset. And I'm using code below to put my binary on Android to execute in the future

  


  protected override void OnCreate(Bundle bundle)
{
    base.OnCreate(bundle);

    if (ContextCompat.CheckSelfPermission(this, Manifest.Permission.ReadExternalStorage) != Permission.Granted 
        || ContextCompat.CheckSelfPermission(this, Manifest.Permission.WriteExternalStorage) != Permission.Granted 
        || ContextCompat.CheckSelfPermission(this, Manifest.Permission.Internet) != Permission.Granted) 
    {
        ActivityCompat.RequestPermissions(this, new string[] {
          Manifest.Permission.ReadExternalStorage, Manifest.Permission.WriteExternalStorage, Manifest.Permission.Internet
        }, 0);
    }

    PrepareFFmpeg();
}

private void PrepareFFmpeg()
{
    var assetManager = Android.App.Application.Context.Assets;
    string path = "libs/ffmpeg";
    string destinationPath = Path.Combine(Android.App.Application.Context.ApplicationInfo.DataDir, "ffmpeg");

    var directoryPath = Path.GetDirectoryName(destinationPath);
    if (!Directory.Exists(directoryPath))
    {
        Directory.CreateDirectory(directoryPath);
    }

    using (var inputStream = assetManager.Open(path))
    {
        if (File.Exists(destinationPath)) 
        {
            File.Delete(destinationPath);
        }

        using (var outputStream = File.Create(destinationPath))
        {
            inputStream.CopyTo(outputStream);
        }
    }

    Java.Lang.JavaSystem.SetProperty("java.io.tmpdir", destinationPath);
    Java.Lang.Runtime.GetRuntime().Exec("chmod 700 " + destinationPath);

    FFmpeg.SetExecutablesPath(destinationPath);
}


  


  public static class FFmpegService
{
    public static async Task ConvertVideoAsync(string inputPath, string outputPath, string format)
    {
        if (RuntimeInformation.IsOSPlatform(OSPlatform.Windows))
        {
            string ffmpegPath = GetFFmpegPath();
            string arguments = $"-i \"{inputPath}\" \"{outputPath}.{format}\"";

            ProcessStartInfo startInfo = new ProcessStartInfo
            {
                FileName = ffmpegPath,
                Arguments = arguments,
                RedirectStandardOutput = true,
                RedirectStandardError = true,
                UseShellExecute = false,
                CreateNoWindow = true,
            };

            using Process process = new Process { StartInfo = startInfo };
            process.Start();
            await process.WaitForExitAsync();
        }
        else
        {
            //IConversion conversion = await FFmpeg.Conversions.FromSnippet.Convert(inputPath, $"{outputPath}.{f*-  .ormat}");
            //string command = $"-i {inputPath} -f {format} {outputPath}";

            //ProcessStartInfo psi = new ProcessStartInfo();
            //psi.FileName = FFmpeg.ExecutablesPath;
            //psi.Arguments = command;
            //psi.RedirectStandardOutput = true;
            //psi.RedirectStandardError = true;
            //psi.UseShellExecute = false;

            //Process process = Process.Start(psi);
            //process.WaitForExit();

            //string output = process.StandardOutput.ReadToEnd();
            //string error = process.StandardError.ReadToEnd();

            string outputPathWithFormat = $"{outputPath}.{format}";
            IConversion conversion = await FFmpeg.Conversions.FromSnippet.Convert(inputPath, outputPathWithFormat);
            IConversionResult result = await conversion.Start();
        }
    }

    private static string GetFFmpegPath()
    {
        //string platformFolder = RuntimeInformation.IsOSPlatform(OSPlatform.Windows) ? "Windows" : "Android";
        //return Path.Combine("Platforms", platformFolder, "ffmpeg", "ffmpeg");
        if (RuntimeInformation.IsOSPlatform(OSPlatform.Windows))
        {
            return Path.Combine("Platforms", "Windows", "ffmpeg", "ffmpeg");
        }
        else
        {
            return null;
        }
    }
}


  


  I'm trying to use FFmpegService to convert video in any desired format I can by passing it in the arguments of the method (Windows works fine).

  


  In my service I also tried to use Xabe.FFmpeg but it always gives couldn't find part of path (path here). When using more manual approach I face another problem every time : Permission denied.
For path I tried /data/data/APPNAME and cache directories. It always results in problems mentioned above.

  


  I downloaded FFmpeg binary from this repository : https://github.com/tomaszzmuda/Xabe.FFmpeg/releases/tag/executables

  


  My goal is to get conversion working for any format and for at least two platforms : Android and Windows, but if you can tell me how to do it on other platforms as well - I would be grateful.

  


  Additional question : If you can tell me the best practice setting standard path for storing converted audio and video, thanks.

  


  If you need more details, please specify I would happily provide them.
P.S. : don't look at the quality of code, I tried to code this for week so I didn't care about quality, I just want to learn how can I do this.

  


  Thanks for your time and attention !

  


  Project : Maui Blazor .Net 7.0

  


• Premium Plugins now available on the Piwik Analytics Marketplace

  2 novembre 2016, par Piwik Core Team — Community, Press Releases

  We are super excited to announce the launch of three new premium plugins which are now available on the Piwik Marketplace : A/B Testing, Media Analytics, and Activity Log.

  All three plugins are easy to use and come with 100% data ownership, documentation, integration with Piwik, powerful data exports and no data limits.

  These first premium plugins and the new Marketplace capabilities have been designed and built with love by InnoCraft – the new company brought to you by the makers of Piwik.

  1. A/B Testing

  A/B Testing helps you grow your business by comparing different versions of your website or app to detect the most successful version that increases your sales, revenue, conversions, pageviews, and more.

  A/B tests are also known as experiments or split tests. In an A/B test you show two or more different variations to your users (visitors) and the variation that performs better wins. When a user enters the experiment, a variation will be randomly chosen and the user will see this variation for all subsequent visits. Piwik A/B testing uses advanced statistical analysis to detect which variation performs better for your conversion goals and success metrics. Even small tests can increase your sales and conversions massively !

  Get it now on the Marketplace

  Learn more here :

  • A/B Testing – Experiments (website).
  • List of all features on the Marketplace : A/B Testing Plugin.

  • The A/B Testing User Guide and the A/B Testing FAQ help you getting started in running A/B tests. The A/B Testing developer guides help you embedding and implementing A/B tests into your project.

  • A/B Testing Platform for Piwik Analytics (blog post).

  

  2. Media Analytics

  Do you have videos or audio on your website, or in an app ? Media Analytics gives you powerful insights into how your audience watches your videos and listens to your audio, to ultimately maximize your success.

  Learn all about your audience. Which media your users are playing, for how long, how often, and where they dropped off ? Where are your users located around the world ? Who your audience are and what did people do before and after watching a video or listening to audio ? Many of the reports are also available in Real time, so you can gain insights and react quickly.

  Get it now on the Marketplace

  Learn more here :

  • Media Analytics (website).
  • List of all features on the Marketplace : Media Analytics plugin.
  • Screenshots for Media Analytics.

  • The Media Analytics User Guide and the Media Analytics FAQ cover on how to get the most out of this plugin. The Media Analytics developer guides help you setting up the tracking of your video and audio.

  • 
    Powerful Video Analytics and Audio Analytics for Piwik
    (blog post).

  

  3. Activity log

  Keep an eye on everything that is happening on your Piwik platform with the Activity Log plugin.

  The activity log, also known as audit log or audit trail, improves your Piwik’s security and diagnostic by showing a chronological set of entries that provides documentary evidence of activities that happened in your Piwik. It allows Piwik Super Users to quickly review the actions performed by members of your organization or clients, and also lets every user review details of their own actions.

  Get it now on the Marketplace

  Learn more in the Activity Log FAQ or see a list of all the features on the Marketplace : Activity Log plugin.

  

  The Piwik Marketplace guarantees

  Purchasing on the Piwik Marketplace is easy and safe. Check out our guarantees :

  • Marketplace refund policy : 14 Day Money Back Guarantee.
  • Safe & Secure Payments.
  • 1-click Installation & Update.

  Why premium plugins ?

  Researching, building, documenting, testing and maintaining quality products take years of experience and months of work. When you purchase a premium plugin from the Marketplace, you get a fully working product, with free updates for the duration of the license and you stay in full control of your analytics data. When purchasing premium plugins you also directly help the Piwik core engineers to continue to grow and innovate ! That’s because a % of earnings on premium plugin license sales directly fund new Piwik versions and more amazing features. Learn more in the FAQ : What are premium plugins ?.

  About InnoCraft

  These first three premium plugins have been designed and built with love by InnoCraft. InnoCraft is a new company founded by the creator of Piwik along with the lead engineers of Piwik based in Wellington, New Zealand. At InnoCraft, product experts, designers and engineers are passionate about crafting high quality and innovative products to help grow your business and to maximize your success.

  Learn more on the company website : www.innocraft.com

  To stay updated on their releases, follow InnoCraftHQ on Twitter or Like InnoCraft on Facebook.

  

  Is the Piwik Marketplace open to all ?

  Yes, our marketplace allows other companies and developers to sell their plugins to all Piwik Analytics users. If you are a developer or a company interested in selling your plugin(s) on our Marketplace please contact us. As a developer selling plugins, you will get paid every month for your earnings, and you will be able to see detailed reports about your sales, upload new plugin updates, respond to pre-sales enquiries, etc.

  Resources

  Learn more :

  • The Piwik.org Privacy Policy has been updated (a new “Scope” and “Contact us” sections).
  • New Terms and Conditions for the Piwik Marketplace (plugins.piwik.org).
  • New Piwik Marketplace FAQs.
  • What are premium plugins and how do they differ from free plugins ?.

  We are looking forward to your continued support with the Piwik project as we expand and offer you more ways to maximize your success.

  Please contact the Marketplace team with any questions or feedback.

  Wishing you a warm : Happy Analytics !

• WebVTT as a W3C Recommendation

  1er janvier 2014, par silvia

  Three weeks ago I attended TPAC, the annual meeting of W3C Working Groups. One of the meetings was of the Timed Text Working Group (TT-WG), that has been specifying TTML, the Timed Text Markup Language. It is now proposed that WebVTT be also standardised through the same Working Group.

  How did that happen, you may ask, in particular since WebVTT and TTML have in the past been portrayed as rival caption formats ? How will the WebVTT spec that is currently under development in the Text Track Community Group (TT-CG) move through a Working Group process ?

  I’ll explain first why there is a need for WebVTT to become a W3C Recommendation, and then how this is proposed to be part of the Timed Text Working Group deliverables, and finally how I can see this working between the TT-CG and the TT-WG.

  Advantages of a W3C Recommendation

  TTML is a XML-based markup format for captions developed during the time that XML was all the hotness. It has become a W3C standard (a so-called “Recommendation”) despite not having been implemented in any browsers (if you ask me : that’s actually a flaw of the W3C standardisation process : it requires only two interoperable implementations of any kind – and that could be anyone’s JavaScript library or Flash demonstrator – it doesn’t actually require browser implementations. But I digress…). To be fair, a subpart of TTML is by now implemented in Internet Explorer, but all the other major browsers have thus far rejected proposals of implementation.

  Because of its Recommendation status, TTML has become the basis for several other caption standards that other SDOs have picked : the SMPTE’s SMPTE-TT format, the EBU’s EBU-TT format, and the DASH Industry Forum’s use of SMPTE-TT. SMPTE-TT has also become the “safe harbour” format for the US legislation on captioning as decided by the FCC. (Note that the FCC requirements for captions on the Web are actually based on a list of features rather than requiring a specific format. But that will be the topic of a different blog post…)

  WebVTT is much younger than TTML. TTML was developed as an interchange format among caption authoring systems. WebVTT was built for rendering in Web browsers and with HTML5 in mind. It meets the requirements of the <track> element and supports more than just captions/subtitles. WebVTT is popular with browser developers and has already been implemented in all major browsers (Firefox Nightly is the last to implement it – all others have support already released).

  As we can see and as has been proven by the HTML spec and multiple other specs : browsers don’t wait for specifications to have W3C Recommendation status before they implement them. Nor do they really care about the status of a spec – what they care about is whether a spec makes sense for the Web developer and user communities and whether it fits in the Web platform. WebVTT has obviously achieved this status, even with an evolving spec. (Note that the spec tries very hard not to break backwards compatibility, thus all past implementations will at least be compatible with the more basic features of the spec.)

  Given that Web browsers don’t need WebVTT to become a W3C standard, why then should we spend effort in moving the spec through the W3C process to become a W3C Recommendation ?

  The modern Web is now much bigger than just Web browsers. Web specifications are being used in all kinds of devices including TV set-top boxes, phone and tablet apps, and even unexpected devices such as white goods. Videos are increasingly omnipresent thus exposing deaf and hard-of-hearing users to ever-growing challenges in interacting with content on diverse devices. Some of these devices will not use auto-updating software but fixed versions so can’t easily adapt to new features. Thus, caption producers (both commercial and community) need to be able to author captions (and other video accessibility content as defined by the HTML5 element) towards a feature set that is clearly defined to be supported by such non-updating devices.

  Understandably, device vendors in this space have a need to build their technology on standardised specifications. SDOs for such device technologies like to reference fixed specifications so the feature set is not continually updating. To reference WebVTT, they could use a snapshot of the specification at any time and reference that, but that’s not how SDOs work. They prefer referencing an officially sanctioned and tested version of a specification – for a W3C specification that means creating a W3C Recommendation of the WebVTT spec.

  Taking WebVTT on a W3C recommendation track is actually advantageous for browsers, too, because a test suite will have to be developed that proves that features are implemented in an interoperable manner. In summary, I can see the advantages and personally support the effort to take WebVTT through to a W3C Recommendation.

  Choice of Working Group

  FAIK this is the first time that a specification developed in a Community Group is being moved into the recommendation track. This is something that has been expected when the W3C created CGs, but not something that has an established process yet.

  The first question of course is which WG would take it through to Recommendation ? Would we create a new Working Group or find an existing one to move the specification through ? Since WGs involve a lot of overhead, the preference was to add WebVTT to the charter of an existing WG. The two obvious candidates were the HTML WG and the TT-WG – the first because it’s where WebVTT originated and the latter because it’s the closest thematically.

  Adding a deliverable to a WG is a major undertaking. The TT-WG is currently in the process of re-chartering and thus a suggestion was made to add WebVTT to the milestones of this WG. TBH that was not my first choice. Since I’m already an editor in the HTML WG and WebVTT is very closely related to HTML and can be tested extensively as part of HTML, I preferred the HTML WG. However, adding WebVTT to the TT-WG has some advantages, too.

  Since TTML is an exchange format, lots of captions that will be created (at least professionally) will be in TTML and TTML-related formats. It makes sense to create a mapping from TTML to WebVTT for rendering in browsers. The expertise of both, TTML and WebVTT experts is required to develop a good mapping – as has been shown when we developed the mapping from CEA608/708 to WebVTT. Also, captioning experts are already in the TT-WG, so it helps to get a second set of eyes onto WebVTT.

  A disadvantage of moving a specification out of a CG into a WG is, however, that you potentially lose a lot of the expertise that is already involved in the development of the spec. People don’t easily re-subscribe to additional mailing lists or want the additional complexity of involving another community (see e.g. this email).

  So, a good process needs to be developed to allow everyone to contribute to the spec in the best way possible without requiring duplicate work. How can we do that ?

  The forthcoming process

  At TPAC the TT-WG discussed for several hours what the next steps are in taking WebVTT through the TT-WG to recommendation status (agenda with slides). I won’t bore you with the different views – if you are keen, you can read the minutes.

  What I came away with is the following process :

  1. Fix a few more bugs in the CG until we’re happy with the feature set in the CG. This should match the feature set that we realistically expect devices to implement for a first version of the WebVTT spec.
  2. Make a FSA (Final Specification Agreement) in the CG to create a stable reference and a clean IPR position.
  3. Assuming that the TT-WG’s charter has been approved with WebVTT as a milestone, we would next bring the FSA specification into the TT-WG as FPWD (First Public Working Draft) and immediately do a Last Call which effectively freezes the feature set (this is possible because there has already been wide community review of the WebVTT spec) ; in parallel, the CG can continue to develop the next version of the WebVTT spec with new features (just like it is happening with the HTML5 and HTML5.1 specifications).
  4. Develop a test suite and address any issues in the Last Call document (of course, also fix these issues in the CG version of the spec).
  5. As per W3C process, substantive and minor changes to Last Call documents have to be reported and raised issues addressed before the spec can progress to the next level : Candidate Recommendation status.
  6. For the next step – Proposed Recommendation status – an implementation report is necessary, and thus the test suite needs to be finalized for the given feature set. The feature set may also be reduced at this stage to just the ones implemented interoperably, leaving any other features for the next version of the spec.
  7. The final step is Recommendation status, which simply requires sufficient support and endorsement by W3C members.

  The first version of the WebVTT spec naturally has a focus on captioning (and subtitling), since this has been the dominant use case that we have focused on this far and it’s the part that is the most compatibly implemented feature set of WebVTT in browsers. It’s my expectation that the next version of WebVTT will have a lot more features related to audio descriptions, chapters and metadata. Thus, this seems a good time for a first version feature freeze.

  There are still several obstacles towards progressing WebVTT as a milestone of the TT-WG. Apart from the need to get buy-in from the TT-WG, the TT-CG, and the AC (Adivisory Committee who have to approve the new charter), we’re also looking at the license of the specification document.

  The CG specification has an open license that allows creating derivative work as long as there is attribution, while the W3C document license for documents on the recommendation track does not allow the creation of derivative work unless given explicit exceptions. This is an issue that is currently being discussed in the W3C with a proposal for a CC-BY license on the Recommendation track. However, my view is that it’s probably ok to use the different document licenses : the TT-WG will work on WebVTT 1.0 and give it a W3C document license, while the CG starts working on the next WebVTT version under the open CG license. It probably actually makes sense to have a less open license on a frozen spec.

  Making the best of a complicated world

  WebVTT is now proposed as part of the recharter of the TT-WG. I have no idea how complicated the process will become to achieve a W3C WebVTT 1.0 Recommendation, but I am hoping that what is outlined above will be workable in such a way that all of us get to focus on progressing the technology.

  At TPAC I got the impression that the TT-WG is committed to progressing WebVTT to Recommendation status. I know that the TT-CG is committed to continue developing WebVTT to its full potential for all kinds of media-time aligned content with new kinds already discussed at FOMS. Let’s enable both groups to achieve their goals. As a consequence, we will allow the two formats to excel where they do : TTML as an interchange format and WebVTT as a browser rendering format.