IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cellar] AD Review: draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Thu, 09 January 2020 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69E341208E9; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 08:14:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vslyWHL6Qf3Y; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 08:14:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE0071208D7; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 08:14:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Svantevit.local (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 009GDGEj041607 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Jan 2020 10:13:18 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1578586399; bh=WnIyTUlnBWZl9PO0cC7+fDmQJLq/bx3ngnNVEtu+Wn8=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=QtKK3805G5+UhqAcR+5Cnx9o9KpIws7Mc/SwOTk0GX8XyWJNZRZGzPRvRAEvqDYec 9ukw2iGUl0m0NyvNm+xwjWahRa/fkC6WzXIEWmfEo6B+HVNC/zpliXmsE3N/bn2Frv 6DrWuytB+nz/MjNBVRy4ioQF7IWSlhMIp67jgrWg=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Svantevit.local
To: Dave Rice <dave@dericed.com>
Cc: draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1.all@ietf.org, cellar@ietf.org
References: <b71e9496-c924-b970-9094-2b29ba173bdd@nostrum.com> <7DDCA42B-8BDA-4EBD-9C04-F0615265E021@dericed.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <46918a0c-0e03-bb81-3ba1-5554a8ac2392@nostrum.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 10:13:11 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7DDCA42B-8BDA-4EBD-9C04-F0615265E021@dericed.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------2FFDE3CDA411DA8BC183C843"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/b1INNqPtKYoOTNCDiIerI4j_644>
Subject: Re: [Cellar] AD Review: draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1
X-BeenThere: cellar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cellar/>
List-Post: <mailto:cellar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 16:14:16 -0000

On 1/9/20 10:02 AM, Dave Rice wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> Thanks for your review. I have addressed some of these in a pull request at https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFV1/pull/185 and left questions or nudges to other authors below.


Thanks! It looks like one of the questions is for me; I've responded below.


>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> ยง2.2.1:
>>
>>>   The pseudo-code used is based upon the C programming
>>>   language [ISO.9899.1990] and uses its "if/else", "while" and "for"
>>>   functions as well as functions defined within this document.
>> It's a minor nit, but these are keywords, not functions.
> Should both references to the term functions be keywords or just the first? Note there are also two section headers that use the term Functions.


Sorry for the ambiguity -- just the first one. That is:


    The pseudo-code used is based upon the C programming language
    [ISO.9899.2018] and uses its "if/else", "while", and "for" keywords
    as well as functions defined within this document.


I don't think any of the section headers are incorrect.

/a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email