Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)

Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com> Sat, 06 December 2014 05:40 UTC

Return-Path: <aallen@blackberry.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9DC61A8BB3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 21:40:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 AAXudJupiG4i for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 21:40:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-p02.blackberry.com (smtp-p02.blackberry.com [208.65.78.89]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D761A8AFC for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 21:40:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xct108cnc.rim.net ([10.65.161.208]) by mhs214cnc.rim.net with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 06 Dec 2014 00:40:20 -0500
Received: from XCT116CNC.rim.net (10.65.161.216) by XCT108CNC.rim.net (10.65.161.208) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.210.2; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 00:40:19 -0500
Received: from XMB122CNC.rim.net ([fe80::28c6:fa1c:91c6:2e23]) by XCT116CNC.rim.net ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 00:40:19 -0500
From: Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, Gaelle Martin-Cocher <gmartincocher@blackberry.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)
Thread-Index: AQHQDyew2za5sQikUES+QP80tOoCX5x+j7gAgAAgMwCAAChyAIAADcQAgAAeaYCAAKv2gIAB/3mAgAAErgCAAFtGaw==
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2014 05:40:18 +0000
Message-ID: <20141206054017.5955730.89689.3585@blackberry.com>
References: <547511DB.5050100@nostrum.com> <54759A4C.6020806@gmail.com> <5476092D.4010406@nostrum.com> <15EF2452-2C2C-420B-B972-C37EACE57850@apple.com> <547F60A8.3080302@alvestrand.no> <27F838F1-326D-48BD-B553-6FE993E5C34F@apple.com> <92D0D52F3A63344CA478CF12DB0648AADF354465@XMB111CNC.rim.net> <547FA924.3000504@mozilla.com> <92D0D52F3A63344CA478CF12DB0648AADF35455C@XMB111CNC.rim.net> <548052E7.1050007@alvestrand.no> <92D0D52F3A63344CA478CF12DB0648AADF359C76@XMB111CNC.rim.net>, <548203E2.90602@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <548203E2.90602@nostrum.com>
Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US
Content-Language: en-CA
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_201412060540175955730896893585blackberrycom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/CMzBHYbADxjxe8ZJQuARbbQ40qo
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 05:40:54 -0000

As Harald already admitted this entire debate has been about companies business interests and not technical merits. There is ABSOLUTELY NO TECHNICAL REASON to have 2 MTI video codecs. This has been company business interest from the start.

Just about every comment I see in this thread is about what advances or disadvantages a particular company that the individual works for.

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
From: Adam Roach
Sent: Friday, December 5, 2014 14:14
To: Gaelle Martin-Cocher; Harald Alvestrand; rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)


On 12/5/14 10:56, Gaelle Martin-Cocher wrote:
> Is that a google position or just an assumption?

We speak as individuals.


> Assuming browsers have to implement both and that this question is out of the way.

I was about to make the same point that Harald did, but he beat me to
it: the questions were asked together because the nature of the
compromise was, for many people, "I'm okay with X if and only if Y".
Characterizing this as an unconditional acceptance of one without the
other is ridiculous.

/a

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb