Re: [codec] possible issues to track

stephen botzko wrote:
> Perhaps something as simple as saying "not worse" instead of "better".

Agreed.

	Jean-Marc

> 
> Stephen Bozko
> 
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org
> <mailto:stewe@stewe.org>> wrote:
> 
>     No, I just suggest to attempt being just a little bit diplomatic.
>     Stephan
> 
> 
> 
>     On 3.25.2010 14:46 , "Jean-Marc Valin" <jean-marc.valin@octasic.com
>     <mailto:jean-marc.valin@octasic.com>> wrote:
> 
>     > Stephan Wenger wrote:
>     >> The comment was from me, and it was addressed towards the
>     sensitivities of
>     >> cross-SDO relationships.  It is one thing if the ITU states that
>     something
>     >> is better than ITU-Rec xxx, but it is another thing if another
>     body states
>     >> this.  Certainly without having received appropriate input from
>     the ITU
>     >> after requesting it through a liaison.
>     >
>     > So do you suggest we drop the ITU codecs from the list? I don't really
>     > mind, considering that I would not expect that part of the
>     requirement to
>     > be a limiting factor.
>     >
>     > Jean-Marc
>     >
>     >> Stephan
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On 3.25.2010 14:32 , "Jean-Marc Valin"
>     <jean-marc.valin@octasic.com <mailto:jean-marc.valin@octasic.com>>
>     wrote:
>     >>
>     >>> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>     >>>> - avoid phrasing subjective comparision in relation to ITU codecs
>     >>> I was actually surprised to see that one come up. As far as I
>     know, most
>     >>> ITU terms of reference include comparisons like "better than
>     G.722 at rate
>     >>> X". Does the ITU phrase this differently then we did?
>     >>>
>     >>> As for the way of discussing the issues, it seems to me like the
>     mailing
>     >>> list is just simpler. Most people so far have commented on the
>     list anyway.
>     >>>
>     >>> Cheers,
>     >>>
>     >>> Jean-Marc
>     >>> _______________________________________________
>     >>> codec mailing list
>     >>> codec@ietf.org <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
>     >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>     >>
>     >>
>     >
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     codec mailing list
>     codec@ietf.org <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
> 
> 