Re: [codec] USAC as reference?

 If we can commit to having the bitstream frozen before the next round of
USAC verification tests, then we can certainly say that in the Liaison, and
request that they include it in their verification tests.

It's up to them to say no.

Regards
Stephen Botzko

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Jean-Marc Valin <
jean-marc.valin@octasic.com> wrote:

> Hi David,
>
>
> On 11-04-15 10:02 AM, David Virette wrote:
>
>> The only reference quality implementation of USAC is owned by the initial
>> proponents of the codec. If the group wants to test OPUS vs USAC, the best
>> way is probably to inform MPEG that IETF would like to conduct some tests
>> comparing those two codecs. Regarding the inclusion of OPUS in the USAC
>> verification tests, the test plan and accompanying workplan have already
>> been agreed and the first round of testing will occur in June. However, it
>> is foreseen to have a second round of testing by the end of the year. It
>> could be proposed to include OPUS in this second phase. As Anisse said,
>> there will be an MPEG meeting in July, this leaves enough time to liaise
>> with MPEG before the next meeting. But I think that only a standardized
>> codec could be included in the USAC verification tests.
>>
>
> I think it's indeed a good idea to liaise with MPEG before the next meeting
> to get Opus included in the second round of USAC testing. I think the
> condition that only standardized codecs can be included again supports the
> idea of first publishing Opus as a proposed standard to facilitate further
> testing.
>
> Cheers,
>
>        Jean-Marc
>
> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> codec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>