On 21/07/15 19:09, Dave Rice wrote: > 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>. >
The correct way to get something solid is to have a specification document, at least two independent implementations and a full-coverage testsuite that ensures that is possible to validate additional implementations with ease. I can't be in Prague, but I'm looking forward to see the outcome of the discussion. lu _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
