Hi Kostya,

> On Jul 21, 2015, at 12:58 PM, Kostya Shishkov <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:52:55AM -0400, Dave Rice wrote:
>> Hi all,
> [...] 
>> The FFV1 specification work may also be reviewed at github [5] with recent 
>> rendering in HTML [6] and PDF [7] available. To participate in the current 
>> standardization efforts of FFV1 please visit the ffmpeg-devel mailing list 
>> [8] or the #ffmpeg-devel [8] IRC channel on freenode.
> 
> I'd suggest that any standardisation includes not only "specification" but
> also an independent implementation - it helps to figure out what's wrong with
> the specification and maybe gives a small standalone library instead of
> something spread out on half a dozen files in a large software project.

Thanks for the suggestion. Possibly the recent work to standardize the Opus 
codec may provide a good model for the creation of a small, standalone 
reference implementation such as https://www.opus-codec.org/downloads/ 
<https://www.opus-codec.org/downloads/>. Actually it looks as if an entire 
standalone reference implementation is embedded into Opus' RFC 6716, see 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6716#appendix-A 
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6716#appendix-A>.

Interestingly the Opus specs gives preference to the reference implementation 
in the case of any conflict: "Additionally, any conflict between the symbolic 
representation and the included reference implementation must be resolved. For 
the practical reasons of compatibility and testability, it would be 
advantageous to give the reference implementation priority in any 
disagreement." Looking forward to tomorrow's discussion.

[...]

Best Regards,
Dave Rice
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to