According to doom9-forum, seems that Tobias is now a member of the Xiph's team.

The current Ogg DS filters will be BSD'ed and go into Xiph CVS but will not become part of the official framework. Tobias will however work with Monty with the current framework and most of the stuff from Ogg DS will eventually make its way to the official framework. But Ogg DS (which is misleadingly named, since it really uses the OGM format which is NOT Ogg but an extension of Ogg) will NOT become official.

[edited according to the info from Tangent]

Tobias told me that before it has been posted on doom9, it´s true.

Edit: OGM is Ogg, ogginfo from Xiph will read it, and if there is a vorbis stream in it it can also display it´s samplerate etc. like in normal Oggs. OGM is just OGG with streams in it that are not defined by xiph, ogginfo will detect the video/subtitle as "unknown logical stream", same for speex or flac-ogg.

OGM is definitely not Ogg.
http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ogm-draft.html.1

Does it matter? Any differences, nomenclature matters and incompatibilities are likely to be worked out now when the DS filters are part of Xiph. This is truly great news, thanks Tobias for joining Xiph.

OGM is not a part of Xiph´s open source free Ogg media project, but an ogm file is an vaild ogg and is within the specs of ogg. ogginfo doesn´t have any problems with OGMs:This tool is a official release from xiph. It does not report any problems with the ogm at all. It is a valid ogg file. And if you think that the tool accepts everything as vaild ogg where it finds "vorbis" in it, just analyse a half ogg or a corrupted ogg, you´ll see it reports errors in the file.
That´s why I don´t understand that no player accept ogm, they´ll only read a ogg with one vorbis stream. They should just ignore other non-vorbis streams instead of ignoring the entire file.

Just because ogms can be read by ogginfo doesn't mean that ogms are valid oggs. Have you read Emmett's statement yet? OGM is an extension which breaks some specs, that's why there is a need for these to be worked out into the original Ogg. This I've verified discussing with Emmett on irc some time back (I also thought that ogm=ogg back then).

Ogginfo really is irrelevant here. In future when the new Ogg framework is done, it is very likely (that's what Monty said) that it can read the old ogm files without problems and need to convert (although it's preferable to convert unless you've already burnt onto CDR). But this still doesn't mean that ogg = ogm.

I already read it, but when you are saying ogm are no vaild oggs, just because of the extension, speex isn´t vaild ogg, too. It creates files with .spx. I also read the ogg-specs and I couldn´t find anything that says that the extension of an ogg-file must be ogg. In the vorbis-specs they probably say vorbis-ogg must have the extension .ogg and there is only one stream in the ogg, with the type vorbis, so and ogm is no valid vorbis, but vaild ogg.
Why is the ending of Speex files .spx and not .ogg? Yes, to see easily if it is a Speex or a Vorbis file. Because the ogm-oggs couldn´t be read by any vorbis-player and nobody could see if it´s a vorbis-ogg or a ogg with video in it, the extension changed to .ogm = OGG Media, to indentify the file easily.
That most likely means ogm is not ogg from the philosophy of the ogg-project for open/free multimedia standards, but nowhere in the artical is written that ogm is no vaild physical ogg bitstream.
That´s all I mean, an ogm-file is a vaild physical ogg bitstream, so it is a vaild ogg-file, but I never said ogm is a part of xiph´s ogg-project. The problem is that many people can´t differentiate between
a.) The ogg-container format by xiph for many different codecs
and
b.) The ogg-project by xiph to create free unpatented open-source multimedia standards.
ogm is a valid physical ogg bitstream (that´s all what ogginfo says), but not part of the ogg-project.

It's people like you who have been causing Emmett to have fits and get pissed off with the OGM project? Why? Because ogg tools do identify ogms as ogg files but can't work with them, and people start bombaring xiph.org asking them what is wrong. They assume that ogg=ogm. The fact still remains that whole ogg tools do identify ogm as valid ogg files, THEY ARE NOT VALID OGG FILES. Is that so hard to understand?

Emmett himself has said that OGM does not conform to the Ogg specs, wtf are you trying to do arguing otherwise if you're not trolling?

Here's Emmett's statement from an irc log (just one of many):
[22:21:40] <Emmett> There's a guy named Tobias, who wrore directshow filters for Ogg, breaking the Ogg spec. His app creates '.ogm' files, which are usually DivX video and Vorbis audio.

Now, go troll elsewhere please.

I always have been essentially. Instead of calling me a troll it would be better to explain detailed why and where ogm is breaking the ogg-specs, and speex for example not.

... and that ogginfo cannot be used to identify valid ogg file?

What kind of reason that is?
Vorbis tools can handle ogm's containing only the vorbis streams (decode, comment), but they ideed can't work with ogm's and ogg's (e.g flac ogg's) which contain streams other than vorbis. Vorbis tools are for handling vorbis streams only, if I get it right, so you can't expect them to work with other streams. How misuse of vorbis tools can cause someone to get pissed off with the originating project?

Anyway this particular (mis)interpretation of ogg specs is history now. So if all those past encoding/muxing/burning efforts won't require any additional converting efforts (which most likely will be this way, according to multiple statements made here and there), I guess everybody's happy then?

As long as you can play or CDs with current OGM data in the future OGG Theora architecture...

Yes, OGM has (duh) a valid bitstream! I mean it works doesn't it?...
But, THERE IS NO POINT IN ARGUING!
OGM is NOT OGG and is not a valid, official, supported, and what not OGG.
I would have thought Emmett's fine article there would make all totally clear why OGM is NOT and must not be considered OGG at ALL.
So, i totally agree with tangent, and to everyone, just read it and accept the facts.

I asked Tobias Waldvogel and he confirmed what I said: a ogm file is a valid ogg bitstream, which is compatible with the ogg-specs.
I know the first versions were not 100% compatible, but that has been fixed nearly a year ago, in version 0.9.8.1: Fixed the Ogg Page sequence (Now the ogg file starts with the first pages of all streams according to the Ogg specs).
There is just one very minor bug, to all granulepos there should be added 1, because in ogg you normaly store the time after the packet is decoded, not before. That will be corrected in the next version.
That are the facts.

How told you ogm is no valid ogg bitsream? I read the article now 4 times, but I still can´t find anything that says OGM is no valid ogg bitstream.
It´s not ogg from the philosophy etc. and it´s not supported by xiph, I never said something else and Emmet is completly true in this article, but anyway a ogm is a valid ogg bitstream (since 0.9.8.1).

I just found out google translates sometimes not very good, and "essentially" doesn´t make any sense in my previous post, I just used google and translated "sachlich" from german. It means based on facts and objectively, without insulting anybody.

OK you know what, now i see all that matters to you is the fact that it has a "valid ogg bitstream"...It's not a valid ogg, but that doesn't matter to you. Or actually i'm confused:

...it's not a valid ogg. Forget "bitstream", did i say bitstream? I said ogg, it's not a valid ogg file. (heck, it's ogm..)
OK so now you acknowlage it's not valid ogg so forget it, this is really going nowhere..

I'll break up the silly arguing between the letter "m" and "g" to ask what the Tobias' Ogg DS filters do, in simple terms that I can understand

You install his DirectShow filters, and you're able to play ogg files with any player that supports DS filters, like Windows Media Player.

So if ogm is a valid ogg stream which breaks ogg specs, does it make ogm a valid ogg stream?

Jeeeze,

stop that, even i am starting to get confused now ... lol ...

After having read this thread about 3 times in a row (like: what did the other one say two posts before...) I have two questions left:
Do I get it right, that if you want to call a file 'OGG' (no matter what the extension of the file might be), the data inside it has to be content created with open source (GPL'ed) software? Is that the difference that Emmet (or the spec) makes?

And if 'yes', does that software also have to be part of the xiph project?