Re: [video-codec] Charter issues from BoF - rubber stamping VP.next
"Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterribe@xiph.org> Fri, 18 January 2013 14:37 UTC
Return-Path: <tterribe@xiph.org>
X-Original-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31EAB21F8462 for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:37:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.304
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.304 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.227, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HOST_MISMATCH_COM=0.311, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GBttIVRcsXWg for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:37:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.mozilla.org (mx2.corp.phx1.mozilla.com [63.245.216.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE1421F845E for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:37:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.16.25] (pool-96-241-176-56.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.241.176.56]) (Authenticated sender: tterriberry@mozilla.com) by mx2.mail.corp.phx1.mozilla.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 43991F20F3 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:37:47 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50F95E31.3040407@xiph.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:37:37 -0800
From: "Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterribe@xiph.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120625 SeaMonkey/2.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: video-codec@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [video-codec] Charter issues from BoF - rubber stamping VP.next
X-BeenThere: video-codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Video codec BoF discussion list <video-codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/video-codec>, <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/video-codec>
List-Post: <mailto:video-codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec>, <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:37:48 -0000
> consensus. I prefer bring small incremental bits of technology to the > WG and we get something working together that is better than what > would have happened otherwise but I can easily live with we test > VP.next and if it is good enough, we publish it. That is my preference as well, and in response to this point of yours I removed the text that suggested we might look around and adopt some existing codec. The charter now just says, "At present it appears that ensuring the existence of such a codec will require a development effort within the working group." What else can we do to make this clearer?
- Re: [video-codec] Charter issues from BoF - rubbe… Timothy B. Terriberry