Re: [Cellar] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1-16

Jerome Martinez <jerome@mediaarea.net> Sun, 09 August 2020 20:51 UTC

Return-Path: <jerome@mediaarea.net>
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 12D253A0D65 for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 13:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.949, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ekSU5dyQGRLb for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 13:51:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 11.mo6.mail-out.ovh.net (11.mo6.mail-out.ovh.net [188.165.38.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 119B53A0D63 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 13:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from player688.ha.ovh.net (unknown [10.108.54.67]) by mo6.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB71222600 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 22:51:52 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mediaarea.net (unknown [62.147.199.69]) (Authenticated sender: jerome@mediaarea.net) by player688.ha.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C188150BFC74; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 20:51:49 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-104R00576e5322b-9d85-4a0e-8a0b-88a1b1730a87, 608671285ED90489EBE68BEB245C4D25BF85EF76) smtp.auth=jerome@mediaarea.net
To: cellar@ietf.org, Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
References: <159470027331.24170.16229303627582288772@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Jerome Martinez <jerome@mediaarea.net>
Message-ID: <33c0b0c6-d4b1-d6e9-be13-4de97eb6b9bc@mediaarea.net>
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2020 22:51:48 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <159470027331.24170.16229303627582288772@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 7054888817973203072
X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK
X-VR-SPAMSCORE: 0
X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrkeeigdduheefucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuqfggjfdpvefjgfevmfevgfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecuhedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgfgsehtkeertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpeflvghrohhmvgcuofgrrhhtihhnvgiiuceojhgvrhhomhgvsehmvgguihgrrghrvggrrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeekhfdvgfeuhffggefhfffhtdehfffhudeuveejtdfgjefgleelueejheetfffgjeenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecukfhppedtrddtrddtrddtpdeivddrudegjedrudelledrieelnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhpqdhouhhtpdhhvghlohepphhlrgihvghrieekkedrhhgrrdhovhhhrdhnvghtpdhinhgvtheptddrtddrtddrtddpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehjvghrohhmvgesmhgvughirggrrhgvrgdrnhgvthdprhgtphhtthhopegtvghllhgrrhesihgvthhfrdhorhhg
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/gsPGi6uSFXJBde4jw5CY2yp8KFY>
Subject: Re: [Cellar] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1-16
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: Sun, 09 Aug 2020 20:51:57 -0000

Hi Joel,

On 14/07/2020 06:17, Joel Halpern via Datatracker wrote:
> [...]
>
> Minor issues:
>      Section 3.4 (Context) introduces the notation Q_{#}[ subscript }.  As that
>      is the first reference to Q_{#}, it is rather confusing to the reader.  I
>      grant that the term is defined in the next section (3.5).  Couldn't they be
>      reversed?
>
>      Section 3.8.1.1 refers to C(i), C_{i}, and C_i.  Are these all the same
>      thing.
>
>      Section 3.8.1.2 refers to get-rac (which is treated as a function in the
>      pseudo-code) as being the process described in section 3.8.1.1.  The text
>      in 3.8.1.1 does not call out any of its computed values as an explicit
>      result or return.  While I would guess that the intention is to use the
>      byte stream (B()), the text does not actually say that.  If that is the
>      intention, could the last line of 3.8.1.1 be "get_rac() returns sequential
>      bytes from the Byte Stream (B()) as computed by the computation described
>      in section 3.8.1.1"?

Thank you for your review, I have addressed them in a pull request at 
https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFV1/pull/223

Jérôme