Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCWeb

Basil Mohamed Gohar <basilgohar@librevideo.org> Tue, 03 December 2013 03:10 UTC

Return-Path: <basilgohar@librevideo.org>
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 8CACE1AD8CD for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 19:10:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 wve8-FqnU-MO for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 19:10:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.zaytoon.hidayahonline.net (zaytoon.hidayahonline.net [173.193.202.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968531AD73F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 19:10:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (d60-65-38-134.col.wideopenwest.com [65.60.134.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: basilgohar@librevideo.org) by mail.zaytoon.hidayahonline.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0476F9D935D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 22:10:17 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <529D4B96.7070901@librevideo.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 22:10:14 -0500
From: Basil Mohamed Gohar <basilgohar@librevideo.org>
Organization: Libre Video
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <DUB127-W23531D0E8B15570331DB51E0EE0@phx.gbl>, <52974AA8.6080702@cisco.com>, <1F79045E-8CD0-4C5D-9090-3E82853E62E9@nominum.com>, <52976F56.4020706@dcrocker.net>, <3CD78695-47AD-4CDF-B486-3949FFDC107B@nominum.com>, <5006.1385666853@sandelman.ca>, <D4D5920A-E041-42E8-BB1C-1CB24FBEE3F4@nominum.com>, <BLU169-W1176AB7AECF0757C380A70E93EE0@phx.gbl>, <20131129060936.GV3245@audi.shelbyville.oz>, <6mkp9912042i9gkg87fc3ji8g9tkv6uqrh@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>, <529CEAA6.9000501@librevideo.org>, <e5bq99dg3h6e82mnsn6k21aunc9eqlvc7q@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <BLU169-W106FB8C3C3D786719B310A293D50@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU169-W106FB8C3C3D786719B310A293D50@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCWeb
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: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 03:10:22 -0000

On 12/02/2013 09:43 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>  > I think it is highly relevant whether the mandatory-to-implement
> codec supports two people in typical German households communicate via
> video in sign language...
>  
> [BA] This isn't just an issue for Germany.   An inability to support
> sign language would be "highly relevant" to compliance with the proposed
> Section 255/508 revision in the US. 
>  
> From:
> http://www.access-board.gov/attachments/article/490/draft-rule.pdf,
> Section 408.8:
>  
> "408.8 Video Communication.  Where ICT that provides two way voice
> communication includes real time video functionality, the quality of the
> video shall be sufficient to support communication using sign language."

I believe this is a moot point for H.261, as even at relatively low
bitrates, in an unoptimized configuration, it can produce sufficiently
high quality to clearly convey a person communicating with sign
language.  Please see my recent post entitled, "H.261 encoding samples
at typical bitrates - sign language example" or the actual examples here
(please see the text file that explains the real rates that ffmpeg
ended-up using):

http://media.basilgohar.com/rtcweb/

-- 
Libre Video
http://librevideo.org