Re: [rtcweb] Opinions are fine, bypassing a vote is not

Eric,

Just so there is no confusion: if you manage to convince us that X is 
"strictly better" than H.261 then I'd jump on board. I was trying to 
explain that many people are trying to remove H.261 as an option by 
explaining how bad it is. Going down this road won't change our minds 
because we already agree that it is a shitty codec.

The only way to convince us that X is "strictly better" than H.261 is to 
talk about X (not H.261) and demonstrate that it meets our IPR 
requirements. Do that, and you will have my vote (and probably that of 
others).

Kind regards,
Gili

On 23/11/2013 2:04 PM, Ron wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 06:59:14AM -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>> I would like to push back on this a bit. Say that we had general consensus
>> that Theora was strictly better than H.261.
> Do you think that such a consensus might actually exist?
>
> It seems fairly obvious to me that Theora would be a better choice than
> H.261, but I haven't seen any indication that it wouldn't be subject to
> exactly the same FUD that VP8 has.  Is my impression wrong about that?
>
> If it's not, then H.261 _does_ have the advantage of its IPR and licencing
> situation being far less controversial - dare I say near to irrefutable?
>
> I'd be willing to entertain a consensus call on the idea that Theora was
> considered _strictly_ better than H.261 here.  And happy to be proven
> wrong in this case.
>
>
>> I'm already pretty sad about all the options
> amen.
>
>> and I don't think it's bad to winnow the field if there is near-unanimity
>> on something....
> I agree.  I'm likewise disappointed that your repeated hints about the
> troubles of voting for a field filled with many questionable options
> seems to have been lost in the noise.
>
>    Ron
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb